Anyone else play this? Discuss designs, how fricked your latest campaign has becomes (UK/US players need not post), how many flags you've risen in minority-populated colonies.
>for those wonder what the frick this is:
Rule the Waves is a trilogy of naval management and combat games, where you take the role of the head of a nation's Navy. Design ships, manage research, wage war and do all the usual stuff you'd expect in a strategy game. Of course, the game loves throwing shit in your way, from politicians demanding you focus on building a particular type of ship they heard is good from their cousin, rival nations signing alliances with others right before you're about to spring a war on them, your engineers fricking up their design calculations and now your new battlecruiser you dumped half the naval budget into can't actually make it's top speed.
Rule the Waves covers 1900-1925, RtW2 extends this to 1955, RtW3 expands to 1890-1970, meaning you'll start with the final ironclads and finish with guided missile cruisers and jet fighters.
Beautiful
1/2 of the entire Chinese economy right here.
I'm honestly not sure which nation is harder to play as, Spain or China. While Spain gets at least something approaching a budget, China does have the distance that means they might only have to fight a smaller section of any European power's fleet
*Economy on fire*
*Mass famines as farmers are forced to work on dockyards*
*Several months of archaic labour resulting in many casualties*
*No money for escort cruisers or destroyers left*
>Ship is finally complete
>War with japan and gets torped instantly
Im cooming from the thought of large investments sinking into the abyssal depths.
did they finally add font size option?
Allegedly that's coming soon™
how do I get the AI to not run all its warships into the coast
delet
The second and last predreadnought of the People's Revolutionary Army Navy of Greater China, commissioned in the year of the Chairman 1907, gets sent after nearly 25 years of service to Europe for conversion into the People's Revolutionary Army Navy of Greater China's first aircraft carrier.
This will make China the second to last nation to get a carrier, with only Communist Germany lagging behind.
How badly did you lose to the British
It was actually a British/Franco/Russian/American alliance. Took a ton of their ships down but couldn't break the blockade so ended up collapsing after 50-odd months. But later World War Frick China 2 took place and I came out much better
>When that yellow peril hits
How do you even get into that? I assume you used subs / raiders based out of Russia to drive German unrest up without a blockade.
The first International War to Frick China came as a result of refusing to sell my possessions to the Western powers. They didn't take kindly to that. The second started as a war with Germany, and when I blew their expeditionary fleet the frick out it spiked tensions with France and things just kinda spiraled from them. In any case, I held out through a combo of commerce raiding and night actions. I ended up having a bizarre follow-up war with Germany shortly afterwards, which consisted of a year and a half of us doing absolutely nothing as we shared no sea zones, then they abruptly collapsed into gommunism.
My usual method is
>elongated hexagonal layer behind forward turrets to represent main superstructure
>smaller hex for the "tower"
>toss some fighting tops, masts and rangefinders on top
>repeat fore of the aft turrets, but smaller
>make a boat/seaplane handling area with a crane
Thanks man, I'll give it a try tonight. I've been playing UA:D to scratch that naval building itch but it's not the same.
Why so intel invested????
To steal tech maybe?
Does anyone know of any tutorials on how to make nice looking ships in RTW3? Preferably text but videos would be great too. I had it down pretty well in RTW2 but can't seem to do as well in the newest iteration.
Inb4 it doesn't matter. Yeah I know. But my autism won't let me enjoy the game without making historically accurate, clean looking ships.
>I had it down pretty well in RTW2 but can't seem to do as well in the newest iteration.
Wait are you saying https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/3784/draw-ship-superstructures is no longer useful?
Big fan of unconventional designs. Since you can now assign ships to divisions and specific roles they're alot more viable
>escort/support/AA cruiser
Built a bunch of these, split them into a few divisions then assigned those divisions to the escort role for my carrier divisions. Actually worked half decently
>cross-deck fire
>only 5-inch guns
>1" Armor
>4 soon-to-be-propane-balls
Even a single lucky hit from a corvette could probably destroy this ship
Good thing it's supposed to be at least 50 miles from any hostile gun bigger than 50cal then. That being said, I did lose one to a torpedo attack during a night engagement
Not with the generation remaining wonky at times. The game constantly put my CV escort ships into independent actions where I have no choice but to get into shoot-outs with the enemy. If there's anything RtW has taught me, it's that you don't design ships for the role you think they should fulfill, but for the role they will be forced to fulfill.
The arc is so limited that pretty much the only time you will get to use cross deck fire is when you are presenting your entire broadside to enemy CLs/DDs. Keeping such a course is fine for capital ships which outrange torps, otherwise you're asking for
to happen.
I remember you Admiral Anon, the games were peak comfy. Sad to see life has caught up to you like that.
Long gone are the days of being a part time college student. Now I've got shit like a mortgage, farm and wife to manage, precious little time for vidya
Iktfb
What's wrong with crossdeck fire, aside from wonky arcs?
Wait till I can post my 4500 ton light cruiser carrier conversion with 8 planes
I bought this on sale yesterday and I've already played for 13 hours. I have no idea what I'm doing and got dumpstered on my first run but I won a couple early wars.
I recommend keeping your first game saved. Then, a couple months from now you can go back and wonder what the frick you were thinking when you made a CA with a triple turret fore and three singles aft.
how do I CAP effectively and harass enemy planes? I'll have a carrier group with assloads of planes and enough fighters, but it feels like CAP is never up and enemies planes can attack unmolested. should I build light carriers for dedicated anti-fighter?
What year and how many fighters do you consider "enough"
33-50% of every carrier complement should be fighters. Once you can build fleet carriers you shouldn't build light carriers anymore because the battle generator will bring them out very unreliably and in annoying subfleets which adds micromanagement to strike creation.
I love the idea of sending out masses of 20-plane light carriers but it's just not worth it from a gameplay perspective.
>ran Rule the Wa/v/es years ago on 8/v/
>would be impossible to do here since lol1image
Did you take anon designed ships for all classes and try to run a game?
Generally what I'd do is come up with three or so preliminary designs and post them, along with the latest tech advancements, espionage reports and so forth, and finally any event decisions that needed to be made. 8ch supported 5 images per post so it was easy, so I'd put it all in a single post, then go off and do something else for 15 minutes or so and let people debate the merits of each design and come to a choice.
I have an old link to an archive, but it looks like it's been nuked since then
Just stitch together one big image
Honestly at this point it's more or less it's that life is just too busy to run a game
I remember you, I was in that thread too.
>shitposteurs sans frontieres
still makes me laugh
>8/v/
I remember your threads. Man, I miss that place. Miss 8Ganker as well.
>inb4 webring
A shell of its former self.
>on sale for 25% off
Alright, I'm sold.
>battle starts with BB in perfect position to get torpedoed
I've lost three of em to this bullshit
How do I get ground based aircraft to kill enemy ships?
Tell them to target enemy ships?
Night training + Jeune École
What should I do with my horde of shitty obsolete battleships? Should I keep them in service and wait for attrition to take care of them, or should they be scrapped?
Turn them into modernized shitty battleships, and then into shitty carriers! I never ever scrap anything.
I'll try, but I'm afraid there may be no salvaging them. May as well keep them to keep that b number up though.
I send them out to die whenever the Italians get uppity. The prestige hit doesn't bother me much since the bottom of the Mediterranean is littered with the corpses of Italians and it all evens out.
I would recommend against keeping truly obsolete ships in service too long. If your outdated 1890s battleship costs 200-300 in maintenance costs per month, that's the cost of a new battleship, almost a dreadnought. And that's one outdated ship, multiply this over.
Meant to say:
>that's the cost of a new battleship over 20 years
>not gimping yourself on purpose (Unless you're playing some shithole like China or Spain)
I prefer to make ships that have unconventional designs
>all DDs carry 6" guns, including 300t designs
>maximum torpedo cruisers
>4" DP armed CL once those guns unlock, leash them to carriers
>large floatplane carrier strike groups
I wish floatplanes had better strike mechanics (why can't I "spot" every plane at once, the entire ocean is my deck). I have a personal mod where I removed all the aircraft techs except floatplanes but it's not very much fun because making strikes is so much work.
Works for me
What the hell I need to try it again then.
>all DDs carry 6" guns, including 300t designs
Why would you do such a thing
I can't stop playing this shit. Is there a modding community?
It's weird, the game is incredibly easy mod in some respects, but impossible in other basic ways. The Discord server is probably your best bet
RTW is the most bizarre mix of hardcoding I've ever seen, everything about ships and planes can be changed stupidly easily (except for some reason jets are hardcoded) but stuff like events is entirely esoteric and mostly hardcoded
Just go to the forums and nab what you want from RTW2, it all pretty much works and it's easy to add everything. I like to custom build my map, so I go grab the Seven Seas Mod and steal from it. Map changes are easy, though I don't like new areas, other than the black sea with the ottomans in. Very easy to add in South America and a bunch of Mediterranean locations
What custom names do you give your ships?
When I played the UK I named my capital ships after military leaders/battles, that is to say similar to the real life naming conventions but I used a different pool.
>Rooke
>Minden
>Boscawen
>Rupert of the Rhine
>Lippe
>Brunswick
>Gordon
>Cochrane
>Saintes
etc.
For Italy, pretty much anything Roman related
>Lictor
>Dux
>Legatus
>Vicarius
>Imperator
>Corvus
>Praetoriae
I either hit random or something stupid. I don't believe there is a naughty word filter
It's a single player game, why would there be? Considering in Let's Plays we had ships of the Black person Killer 9000-class, I think there isn't.
Glad to know I wasn't the only one.
I've given up on names and try to use class types so I can keep up with whatever the frick I've been building and can ID my latest designs. I've been trying to do iterative builds vice new constructions each time so I can keep better mental track.
>CV-1
>CLR-1 (Light Cruiser for Raiding-1)
etc.
I designate the class but let the names autogenerate.
I open up old bodice rippers set on ships and use the first name I see
What was your first nation anon?
Austria.
French. I got fired during the first and unwanted war against "les rosbifs"
CSA
I believe I posted on a thread on here about how I laid down a battleship and it rolled out totally obsolete.
>CSA
Newfren here - is this a mod or an option? I see people playing nations I don't see in my copy.
Go to boomer central, the NWS forums. Most things in the RTW2 can be used in RTW3, and some have been properly ported, like the Netherlands mod. They add nations and new territories, as well as some other possibilities, like new speed tables. It's all the easiest form of modding though, at least the stuff that you can mod, just dump files in the data folder. Just be aware, if you get a nation from the RTW2 forum, you'll need to copy some text into their Warinfo file to get 8 nations
there's a CSA mod for 3 (ported from RTW2) on the forum, last page or so on the mod forum
forgot to link this earlier but I expanded the list of CSA shipnames (mostly for BBs and BCs) just overwrite the csa shipnames file
https://file.io/KrDzOYv4ndQ5
fricked up and linked the wrong file
https://file.io/gkPDygXIEpji
this is the right one
Thanks anon. I'll check it out.
Questions:
How good/bad are the AI generated ship designs?
>sometimes I modify them but they never seem awful
When I get tech advances, do the existing designs take advantage of those, or do I need to do rebuilds/new designs?
>weight reductions, ROF, etc
What are some indicators a ship is obsolete?
>posts about how the starting design are complete garbage but I have no idea why
>maybe all my ships are trash?
it depends. stuff like armor improvements only affect new designs. engine and gun improvements CAN be added if you rebuild the engines/guns during a refit, but usually aren't worth it unless it's a big change like from -1 to +1. gradual fire control improvements are automatically applied to all ships but new FC methods require a refit but are quick and 100% worth it.
ship technology and design improves very fast from 1900 to like 1915 and ships from that period will be obsolete quickly. after 1920 improvements are still made but designs are relatively set in stone, a 1940 BB will be better than a 1920 BB but they'll have similar designs.
>guns during a refit, but usually aren't worth it unless it's a big change like from -1 to +1.
Any other design maxims? I know basics such as "armor yourself against your own guns" type strategy, but what else?
>minimum speed to be useful?
>are -1 guns useless compared to equivalent 0 or +1?
>300t DDs vs 1000t KE?
>secondaries over 5"?
>tertiary guns worth installing? for instance 6 3" guns, or scrap them and take an additional 2x 4"/5" secondaries?
>narrow belts ever worth it?
Just some ideas
I think these all depend on the year and situation you're building your ship unfortunately. For instance, -1 16in guns are better than +1 12 or 13 in guns, 6in secondaries work great, even 7" or larger can work depending on circumstance. I like tertiary guns, early on 3" or 4" guns can knock destroyers out, then you get DP for them before 5" guns, plus you can often slam 20 of them on a BB for almost no weight. On the other hand, I hardly ever build DDs before 500t, if you could put KEs in divisions they'd be completely superior to 300t DDs.
>-1 16in guns are better than +1 12 or 13 in guns, 6in secondaries work great, even 7" or larger can work depending on circumstance.
Any good rule of thumb on gun quality? I haven't been paying a lot of attention to it. I'm still pre-dreadnought and most of my guns are -1.
>On the other hand, I hardly ever build DDs before 500t, if you could put KEs in divisions they'd be completely superior to 300t DDs.
I've been building KEs up to 1000t, and then I started getting Intel reports of every nation under the sun building 300t DDs, so I started building them. The only advantage seemed to be speed, but other than that they seemed like garbage compared to KEs at the moment.
What's the advantage of adding DDs to a division that makes it superior to to KEs?
For big guns, say 10in+, I'd say that the +1 quality of the previous gun is roughly equivalent to the +0 quality of the bigger gun. It's not exact, but I think it's reasonable, if you have +1 15", all things considered, like weight, it's close enough to +0 16" to count. The plus size of planning for bigger guns though, is eventually you may have +1 16" guns, and that rule varies widely at the extremes. 3" guns never get any pen, while 4" do for example.
DDs being in divisions means you can command them easier and attach them to larger divisions which make them more likely to show up in battles. They do have torps as well of course, so if you micro them hard, you might get a lucky kill, I don't bother with that much control though. If you could group 4 KEs together and guarantee they'd screen your Bs, they'd be great.
Got it. I've only had one battle so far in my game. The KEs showed up as a temporary division, and then two of my cruisers.
I'm not 100% on how to fight a war. Another war just broke out with Germany. I moved ships to Northern Europe but keep getting alerts about not having any basing capacity. I could send them to the Med where I have some via Austria, but that's no better than just keeping them on the East Coast, right?
Once I move them to Northern Europe, I just wait for a battle to happen with random ships from both sides?
Do ships assigned to trade protection and raiding have to be in the area?
I assume you're playing the US? If you're at war with Germany, early on its going to be hard to win decisively I'd suspect. Basing warnings are saying you're trying to carry coal all the way across the Atlantic and then lpafing your ships at sea, a difficult task. I'd guess you'll get breakdowns and then ships getting interned after a little while. Thus is what the range drop-down in ship design can help with, longer range means more turns away from home. Otherwise, you ate basically correct, the game abstracts when battles occur, and what ships shwe up. Then, depending on your level of command, you can direct those ships in combat. It's not really different between the Med of the East coast, no. If I were in your shoes, I'd send my CAs to northern Europe as raiders and keep everything expensive back home or in the med for now. But that depends on the CAs you have of course.
Raiders have to be in the area, trade protection doesn't.
Also, while you can't directly declare war, you can use spying and events to raise tensions. Say, as the US or CSA, you really want to have your first war against Spain. Increase intelligence against Spain and pick the events that push tensions up. It's not guaranteed, but can work over a couple years.
You’re the US, you need to design a fleet that can power project across to the North Atlantic and Med, while simultaneously power projecting in the Pacific. Any and all colonies in those areas will help with this. Otherwise, America is easy mode.
In general you're probably better off doing rebuilds on a "schedule" due to how maintenance costs increase if a ship hasn't been overhauled in a long time, rather than doing a rebuild to try to incorporate increased technology. The only exception would be FCs which are super cheap and fast.
You have to also do rebuilds to turn ships into aircraft carriers but that's a different discussion.
Made an updated CSA name list that's much better than my first version
featuring The Planter and Uncle Ben as possible shipnames (somehow they're historical)
https://www.file.io/h45y/download/DaxkMMj27Yb5
fug realised that site only allows one download
here's another link https://mega.nz/file/x1pHXIrb#uBNs04cKib2BwQzj60Cb1xDCGReohRbT5RSzpD_Bh5I
>cottonclad gunboat
Italy
I raped the austrians pretty bad
Russia.
Raped Japan.
Spent 3 decades fighting Germany and France.
Love what you can creating sometimes within dockyard and random tech restrictions. Got -1 10" guns well before 12" and only had 16,700 ton yard. But had been lucky pushing ship design, didn't have 3 inline, but had cross-deck firing. Probably should have armored the turrets a bit more, but against other Bs it should be fine. Trying to get in a war with France as revenge for stealing 4 Bs and a CA from me in my last war with the US, so we'll see how they do
Jesus, how much weight is going into armoring those 5" guns?
Ah, missed that, looks like about 500 tones over 2". Probably a full knot of speed.
It's bullshit you can't put 7" guns on CLs
works on my pc 🙂
Yeah, protected crusiers sure, but not with the later Armour schemes.
Gonna be a long road.
>thread has trouble reaching it's design speed.
Most infuriating message in a game
I am enjoying this game very much, but there need to be some improvements. I'd like to see ways to filter things in the menus, more tooltips, a list of criteria for what makes each ship class so I get an idea of where to start if I'm after a certain class, and many other things. It's great, but it can be so much better.
How do I win these 1890-1930 ship-to-ship battles reliably? Yes, I know you're supposed to bombard the objective/2 TR's and GTFO to port for easy points but how do I steer my ships to win blow for blow? They always run away when I try to cross their T with superior force, but then I have to run away when they bring their 3 BB's against my force of 2 CL's and a 20ft yacht because the battle generator hates us. Is there a strategy deeper than just "crossing the T"s and hoping the RNG lets you win" ?
There's nothing to do about it until around 1905 when torpedoes become incredibly strong. Maybe if you're manually controlling destroyers you can sink the enemy Bs earlier but for the most part armor is winning the armor/armament duel prior to 1900.
With literally everything (RoF/Accuracy/Damage/Penetration/Reload) sucking the best things to rely on is HE shells until Dreadnought Battleships become the norm and a heavy secondary 6" battery doing the same and if you can fit one a tertiary as well.
Just keep lobbing shells to stack on the superstructure damage and pay attention to the enemy battle line for stragglers and pounce on them as soon as they start to break formation, You still won't be sinking a B or CA until they slow down enough you can nearly guarantee a torpedo hit however.
>World War 1 starting in 1918
>CSA (me) + Germany vs France + Spain + USA
>mopping up the US fleet with my BBs, but hurting from ai BC spam
>Germany holding its own against Spain and France
>3.5 years later
>sending communists to Spain has backfired
>budget blown on ineffective social reforms
>sinking half the US fleet and blockading the US coast can only do so much
>Gov. falls to commies
>humiliating treaty
>they steal 6 BBs and 2 BCs, all my 14 in gun ships
>they steal all my Caribbean gains from the last 30 years
>they steal all German colonies
Its the first time I've been forced to complete surrender in either rtw2 or 3, usually I can nab a compromise peace. It'll be interesting being in basically the 1920 German start, 10000 ton build limit and everything. Hopefully I can keep the alliance long term with Germany and go for a round 2 in the 40s.
Does naval presence assist in military invasions if the enemy has no presence there? Obviously winning battles in support of ground combat is good and you need some boats to start the invasion but once underway is there some ground combat modifier from having ships on hand in general?
You serious?
Not that different mechanically from yet another 'your prestigious dumbass got drunk and made an ass of himself' event.
I got it last week in argentina for $4000 crunchy pesos (4 usd final with 1 usd tax) and now is at 40 usd plus 40 taxes.
I feel sorry for the devs, they got less than 1 usd for each copy sold before.
Amazing game, played 12 hours straight, still hope the battles would be easier and more automated, I just like to manage everything but I prefer to just watch the warfare unfold.
>my budget gets slashed because I didn't use the entire navy budget
FRICK ITS JUST LIKE REAL LIFE
yeah moron
try to be running a slight deficit when possible
Is this playable on Steam Deck? I imagine it is, since it's a spreadsheet.
>inb4 frick deck
Great. I have a desktop. I want to know if I can play this while hanging out on the couch as well.
You can play it on basically anything, but I suspect you will struggle in battles.
>Played Germany.
>Won several major wars.
>1920s.
>Had best navy.
>Got access to aircraft.
>Ooh shiny.
>Spent massive amounts of money on all the aircraft.
>Made aircraft carriers.
>Go to war.
>Time to test aircraft carriers out
>Spawn in battle.
>Danger close, run away.
>Aircraft carriers are slow
>scramble everything
>nothing is launching.
>My BBs are doing what they can.
>Do okay, but take heavy damage
How the frick do you use carriers in the interwar period. I know they’re biplanes, but seriously.
carriers weren't decisive until the mid-late 30s and didn't completely overshadow BBs in all roles until the mid 50s
if ww2 kicked off in, like, 1932, the italian strategy of using floatplane fighters as fleet defense would have looked fricking genius, and everyone now would be like "oh yah fighter floatplanes for fleet defense were the obvious solution why did no one else do that", since in the early 1930s when float fighters were as good as (in some cases, better than) their land based counterparts in terms of performance, putting float fighters on catapults and using them for fleet air defense was a good idea. It's just that by the time the war started that was no longer the case.
Can't believe how fricking OP the japs surprise attack mechanic still is. As soon as you get decent DD's with some torps its over for everyone in Asia.
Also the new missile mechanic looks good, I like how I can refit my old CL's and instantly delete the enemy destroyer divisions as soon as the battle begins.
Also the AI seems to have improved its ship designs since RTW2 but the campaign and battle AI is just as wonky
It's not very OP if you don't have manual control of the destroyers. It's just a nice bonus.
Once you get the "aircraft carrier surprise attack" it's pretty OP.
oh yes the super OP strategy of creating a target-rich environment for your enemy's entire BB battleline
>board the enemy BB's and CV's with a banzai charge dropping from the deck of your carriers
kino
yeah and by the time they arrive you've already conquered at least 1 province.
you can also set up a ring of CV's and BC's on southeast asia and the pacific to catch them if you want to.
I always play in rear admiral mode and the DD's still end up sinking most of the capital ships, but they do take heavier losses
The AI doesn’t shift significant forces into the East unless it’s Russia or China(lol), so anything of real value arrives after the first turn surprise.
>https://rtw2.fandom.com/wiki/Guns
Is this still accurate for rtw3? Especially wondering about the damage per time per weight.
This looks like some CAD software that was included in my PC purchase in the late 90s. Can you put modern guns on an ironclad?
>Can you put modern guns on an ironclad?
technically yeah, if you hold onto some ironclad until the 70's you can deck it out in ASM's, CWIS, and AAM's + a helipad if you want
Sometimes you end up with them. Due to a combination of budget restraints, losing a World War, treaties restricting the construction of Carriers plus an additional 15 years of naval arms restrictions followed quickly by a second world war spiraling out of a colonial conflict with Spain, I have two CVL conversions built from CAs laid down in 1895 in active service in 1944.
I get it mate, I've had old hulls from the 1900's serve well into the 50's as CV's, then CVL's with jets and radar aimed guns.
It would be cool if they added more ship classes or the option to turn your older ships into LHD's or whatever.
Just imagine a 1920's BB with two16in turrets and a helo deck, "Ise" style
>past the 1950s
>raider events are entirely unchanged
>get to witness my roided up battleships with missiles getting into a missile flinging match at dick swinging range every time with them either being pulped or outright winning
>ships semi-randomly firing missiles into the abyss
>having to autistically set every aircraft set to attack with missiles until they run out and have what's left do bombing runs
>CV fights end up just being about who runs out of air defence and aircraft first
>helicopters doing recon just disappear half the time
That's why you play on very slow tech and very delayed aircraft.
yeah at some point your capital ships become too squish and it's better to have a shitton of cruisers and destroyers with as many missiles as possible
because jenue ecole won
Are torps worth it on early ships? They don't seem to fire and I can eek out a few more mounts if I take the tubes off.
Depends really, submerged tubes on your capital ships can come in clutch in some occasions like night battles (or if you are really crazy by getting in close with your B's and swatting the enemy battle line with swords) after torp development starts picking up it is definitely worth it to slap em all over your DD's and Cl's, some submerged tubes on BB''s and CA's can also be beneficial but only for extreme cases and night fighting (pre-radar)
I wonder if russia is fun?
building MTB's in the Baltic is kinda fun but having to station half your fleet in Vladivostok gets boring
>fight russia
>see DD Gromoboi
>Boi
>start thinking about bois
What have I become?
>bois
what's that?
thoughts on this spin off game?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1633370/Boat_Crew/
How do I read deck penetration on gun data charts? They mostly say 0. Howmake use of plunging fire to punch through those thin decks?
It's nothing like Rule the Waves, nor is it a strategy game. It's a naval arcade game alongside Bomber Crew and Tank Crew. There's a demo on Steam. I didn't find it very interesting.
Penetration is terrible in 1890-1910, you need to wait until the 1910s before plunging fire actually starts to work.
Use torpedos. Guns are a meme anyways, DD torpedo stacking while capitals tank damage is king until carriers get a couple of years of improvements. Which is right around the time when finally BB/BC get decent fire control technology... A shame.
My brand new BB had a flash fire and blew up right at the start of a battle. I lost a state of the art BB and BC in the same engagement because it tipped so far in Russia's direction. I might roll a new save since it's only 1917.
Feels tough, bros. My first flash.
That happens bro, gotta roll with it though. I had a run last game which wiped out 6 CAs, 2 flash fires, 1 battle loss, a submarine and 2 mines. Cleared out every one I had.
Could be worse, you could have had the game decide to send out only a Floatplane tender and a Light Carrier into battle against a BC and some CLs in the process.
I just want to be able to put KEs and AVs into divisions
>KEs and AVs
What are these things actually good for? AVs seem like scout planes at best, but it seems like enough to just go full speed right at the start of a scenario.
KE seems like TP-quota fodder that's useless if you actually have to fight a raiding cruiser.
KEs can be effective missile swarm boats once those come around, but really they’re good for mine warfare, as you said trade protection, and as cheap foreign stations.
I want to put them in divisions because they're a good screen early on, and they're a class of ship you can build so you should be able to utilize them regularly. With a smaller nation, like Spain, I may have better things to do with my CLs than babysit a couple 16kn Bs. AVs are the same, though more of a mid game thing
A CL can be converted into an AV, or a fast AV built, but they can't be assigned into divisions, so how can you use them regularly? If you design a fast AV with 6 planes and catapults to scout for the fleet, using the float search priority, but it never shows up, what's the point? Division editing is great, vadtly superior to previous games, but the limits are arbitrary
KEs exist to take the job of coastal patrol from your DDs so you aren't caught lacking. The come in handy in the mid game when long wars can have subs sink dozens of small craft per year and KEs can be made in 6 months
I think I like designing ships more than building or using them.
Are there any component packs or easy ways to import stuff like this from shipbucket?
Go to the nws forums, RTW2, there's a download of shipbucket parts for the custom side-view window. For the top down prices, idk, but it'd be nice to have a bit more variety
I looked at that. I don't really frick with the side view piece, so I was hoping to get some more top-down options.
How do aircraft work? I built a bunch of shore airfields but the planes never seem to show up even when I'm in their AO. I can't order any strikes, either.
Yeah, I think top down is one of the esoterica parts of the game, not to be learned by the likes of us. Airfields work more or less on their own, if you're nearby they will scout and launch strikes all on their own. They'll launch strikes on things you've scouted as well, but I find they tend to hit whatever they spot first. You may also want to check that they have aircraft, you can go into the squadrons and see airfields, give them whatever you want for planes. They won't launch spikes outside of your planes ranges though, so early on some airfields can be of minimal use.
I applaud this game for allowing you to fix the disgusting aberration of Anglo-French friendship with wars across the Channel every few years as it should be. Makes me wonder what it would be like to manually place coastal fortifications, especially if they could be on the islands.
the map screen looks like shit, i know visuals are not the focus but only seeing fixed modern borders in a game about expanding your nation is disappointing. also can you kill off countries if you take all their ports?
>in a game about expanding your nation
You should only get territories in strategic locations where you need more basing capacity- the points from reparations are better for your economy than the value of the territory. Blobbing a la Paradox is counterproductive from a mechanical standpoint but it's fun.
With regards to borders it would be hard to keep track of all the changes in Europe with the constant wars/revolutions (not uncommon for Germany and Russia to go through multiple regime changes in the span of a few decades) and in the colonies the modern borders are much the same with the old colonial borders anyhow.
Which game in the series should I play, is there much of a difference between them?
Each one is a straight (more or less) expansion of the last. 1&2 are basically for poorgays
3, but probably pirate the game first and see if you would actually like it. First game is just the ships proper and usually ends by 1950. The second ups the end date to 1965 if I remember correctly and adds planes to the game. 3's is the most built up of the series with having all the nations active unlike the first 2's 6 nations total per session, missile play, and officers getting added to this. Also finally being able to direct where your invasions are actually done instead of just waiting on a chance on what gets invaded by the AI.
Just got the game. What the heck am I supposed to do? Ideal settings and preferences for beginning?
1900 Germany, whatever fleet size you want, let the AI design starting fleet, slow Aircraft dev and no tech variance. You'll start off smaller than France and the UK, but bigger than Russia, beat them up before 1910, then focus on France and England.
I ended up doing an 1890 German start with slight tech variation, because I wanted at least some challenge. not just beat up Russia simulator. How am I doing so far? I just finished building a ship of my new class of battleship, the Zähringen, getting another next month. Building two improved CA, one CL, and two KE. Probably going to focus on building some more corvettes and light cruisers. My intention at the moment is to start a war with Spain or the Japanese, but have been getting bad rng. I have been exploiting tensions with the British to get a higher budget, hoping nothing pops off or I am dead. One problem I am having is either I am doing research wrong, or have gotten horrible rng. I have only researched one tech so far, I am now officially behind in technology. How I have research set up is I have everything on low priority, then two on medium and two on high. Maybe I'll just do two on high, and one medium.
Techs will start flowing in later in the Decade, but even the early ones won't change too much. I just leave everything on medium usually, with only one or two high, but it's pretty RNG based. Your teams may be trying to research something 3 techs ahead and it's just taking forever. Also, if you're putting less than 10% budget in, you'll fall behind a bit.
What's your CA design? I find that a couple big CAs early on can bully 1v1s and 2v2s, using their speed to run down anything. I'm a bit obsessed with finding a use for 7" guns so I wouldn't recommend an exact copy, but if you build a 11000-12000tn CA at 21 kn with 8-9" mains and 5-6" secondaries, you can close down on early CAs/CLs and smash them to pieces. These big CAs won me a war against the US, even being able to take on Bs, they're basically become proto-battlecruisers. Of course, they come with the cost of them as well, so you'll always have less.
My CA's and CL's right now are pretty tiny, 5000tn, their just improvements of what I started with, for reduced design cost. I was waiting for some better tech until I made some new ones with better armor and guns. Might just make some bigger ones now though.
Well, that's not terrible, at least it's got 2" of deck armor. If I was going to go into the 5000-7000 tn range for a CA, I'd aim for a main battery of as many 6" guns as possible, and maybe 6-8 3"s for secondaries, since you have the +1s at start. 4-4.5" belt is fine, and 2" deck is vital to prevent loss of speed through splinter damage. I usually just drop the armor down to 3" for that weight class and build them as CLs. Either you can save time and money building them, or you can push the speed and armament up.
See the light cruiser
, I'd take the Isla de Mallorca up 1v1 vrs the Furst Bismark personally, but I wouldn't have too if I didn't want to, because I'm 2kn faster. Extra speed helps with exhaustion, which just lowers speed by a kn or 2, and also helps with battle damage. On the other hand, I have the "Speed"
engines, so they can fall apart during the battle. Either way, having ships building is best, even if they're not perfect, because you can lose a war while your wunderwaffe is on the slips.
That battleship makes me uncomfortable
Flash fires only happen to heretics, close them down and blast em'!
Obviously 6" guns make more sense game wise, but it's interesting to experiment a bit after a while. Plus, 8" armor is perfectly fine till 1900
Pick small or medium fleet as the unfortunate meta is multiple pages of destroyers and corvettes which you have to shuffle around, you don't also want a full page of cruisers to manage as well.
Okay so I just got this looks like a steep learning curve, only thing I’m missing is so music to go along with game play anything you suggest that fits the era?
So I lost the war against Russia because the United States joined in, in the peace deal the took all my battleships.. yeah I guess that’s a restart
Lol this game makes no sense. So I’m Japan allied with Great Britain who is allied with USA.go to war with Russia who is allied with France, France is allied to USA so everyone ends up at war with each other some how
My spy just told me that Britain is planning to declare war on me. They are going to murder me, and take all my colonies.
What war score does a conflict usually peace out at? Doing somewhat alright against the British, I have half their war score, 5000 vs 2500. My fleet can't really compete, they have 15 battleships to my 4, and mine are much worse, as well as having a lot more cruisers, so they have me blockaded. I lost 3 ships in the war so far, all cruisers, one was unavoidable, one was my mistake, and the other I'm blaming on the AI. Last one was sunk by a torpedo, I gave my light cruiser two opportunities to fire torpedos at another cruiser, and instead the enemy fired a torpedo at me; still won the battle though. My strategy has just been to disengage in fleet battles, engage in favorable cruiser battles, and raid as much as I can. Supposedly the British unrest is getting up there, but they are a liberal democracy so I doubt there will be a revolution, just looking for favorable peace terms at this point. I am taking out all my aggression out on the Spanish after this war.
To resolve the issues I had with AI refusing to launch torpedos, I have just been using captain mode and doing it myself. However, there have been seven instances in which I launch a high speed torpedo 100yd from an enemy ship and I just watch as it phases through it. And I don't mean that it looks like it passes through it, I mean that it goes through the center of a ship and comes out the other side. Is this a feature, is it going under the ship perhaps, or is this some kind of glitch; it is rather frustrating watching as a direct hit on a battleship is just ignored.
War ending is independent of war score; if you try to end the war quickly when those events come up you can stop the bleeding but it might cost some prestige. You'll want a 10-20k advantage if you intend to not just get a white peace without territorial changes.
Once torpedoes gets good around 1910 you can get some pretty high scores (especially on the easier battle control settings) because a single battlecruiser is worth 20k+. If you get the right battle at exactly the right technological point you might see a hundred thousand or more in a single battle.
Actually managed to secure a white peace after a decisive battle against the British; I sunk their brand new Battleship with a torpedo, and the best part is, my cruiser was able to get away.
They immediately declared war on me a few months later. There wasn't even any build up, just two events and then bam, war; really wasn't expecting it, had most of my ships on reserve and everything. Unfortunately for them though, I just finished building two new long range CL's (perfect for raiding), two 11,000 ton CA's, and 16 destroyers. This time I'm taking colonies.
Good hunting!
Managed to sink six British battleships and a few cruisers, and I only lost seven destroyers. The war ended in six months. I wanted to keep it going so I could neuter the British navy, but the Kaiser ended it. Even though by all accounts I won that war, they kept the colony that they invaded. A bit silly, but it wasn't that good anyway, and I'll get it back eventually.
Fighting the French now, and I have won every battle. I find it funny that the two countries I was advised not to go to focus on (
) declared war on me. Can't really fight the Russians either as they are allied with the British. I'm trying to build a super battleship of sorts at the moment, 1901, what is a good design for that?
Well, diplomacy is only partiality controlled by you, I suspect on smaller fleet sizes it isn't so bad though as the UK Doesn't have 30-40 Bs.
Not a lot of reason to lay down a big B in 1901 unless you got some interesting random techs. You could go with something like this, but with 8" or 9" guns on the wings.
I think I went normal battle size, so the British have 20 or so battleships. I'm building this super battleship because everyone has more than me. So, if I can't beat them in quantity, I'll beat them in quality. I have been a bit hesitant to do so because the biggest gun I have at the moment is a 12in, so I was going to put an 11in on it; glad to see that this is a viable option. However, I'm confused by the role B's are supposed to play at this point in the game. I can't match the tonnage of other fleets, so my focus so far has been to create a highly mobile fleet: some fast CL's to raid, some good CL's and CA's to engage cruisers, some proto-battlecruiser B's to engage cruisers without risk, many DD's to engage B's and large CA's, and older ships to fill colonial needs and TP. My real B's don't really fill any role though, except as bait against larger forces and to add a bigger number for blockades. I was hoping to build this big B to have it fulfill at least some operational usefulness. Should I be building more smaller and cheaper B's, and if that's the case, why not just build large CA's instead?
Thanks for the advice. I ended up waiting until 1906 to make it. Took forever to get more gun placements. Got improved 12in guns at the last minute so ended up switching over to those instead of 11in. The. world's first battle cruiser is coming out next month as well, very proud that I am going to beat the British to the punch there by a few months. I did also build some smaller and cheaper B's solely to prevent against blockades. One problem I am having is that all my older ships are beginning to become obsolete. As my fleet tonnage was rather small, I wanted to keep them around. My economy was booming, and I could not build my BB until I got the gun placement tech, I opted to just rebuild all my older ships. My question is, when is a good time to just scrap them? If they still count towards fleet tonnage, why ever get rid of them?
In other news, I demolished the French. Sunk seven battleships and a good few cruisers. Stole the Congo from them and got reparations in the peace deal.
>15.5" belt
>11" turret
No good?
As a rule of thumb, Turret Armor should match or exceed Belt, you're basically wasting tonnage in pointless armor since even if the belt holds a magazine detonation can still blow up the entire ship.
Also what the frick is this.
Dang, alright, that's good to know. I don't know, all my ships have that.
I'm only a month in to building it, would it be worth it to scrap it and wait 4 months for a new design with 14in of belt and turret?
Real admirals only cancel ships if they would prove them wrong and not simply because they are trash.
I've had this little hangpiece show up too, if I play on the Steam Deck. The hull points are placed as they should, but nothing removes the edge. On desktop, it's fine.
It's horrific.
remember, if you find that you are not killing enemy Bs, take your elan pills
>he took the captain mode pill
Why don't these goons shoot torpedoes outside of Captain mode?
I got used to this and I've been fiddling around in Ultimate Admiral, only to get torn up by every ship everywhere launching torps.
captain mode? that was in admiral mode
you if you are aggressive enough the AI will shoot torpedoes
If I'm on a tight budget should I just skip armored cruisers and just stick with capitals with CL and DD screens?
I really want to like this game but the battle system is killing me with being forced to fight a shitty random battle every turn due to having no control over my units in the strategic map. Even worse with the moronic decisions like Germany sending the slowest battleship and 7 destroyers (which don't have enough range so they won't even spawn) to raid a group of french cruisers in the middle of Norway. Now im trying to play Italy after my savegame got corrupted and im always outnumbered in every battle even though i have more ships in the theater. And no matter how many battles i decline shitting over the score i never get one where i have a decent advantage.
After finishing up this rant i decided to actually read the manual instead of skimming over it and now im really glad i pirate before buying, i get that they want to make it harder but this kind of difficulty is just a slog when you have no choice over it. Im going to end this post with something good, and by that i mean that i really like the graphics and most of the interface, specially for the "gameplay over all" design, much better than the ascii roguelikes have
my savegame once again got corrupted, i guess the game isn't happy with me either
Naval nerds are so stupid lmao
>ahhh yes finally a game that allows me to pit the great SS Floggingtonville vs the magnificent Kriegsmarine Prinz von der Rothorp-Flopenberg...
>ahhh yes, but this time i will use my naval expertise to good use, i shall replace the always outdated and unreliable Mit 125.108r mid-sized cannon on the rear end of the ship to a 1924.196 mit F12309 cannon, allowing to gain superior 0.17 knots on speed which will be vital in winning the battle...
fortnite-obsessed 12-year-old detected
>be me
>large Britcuck fleet chasing me in low visibility
>order flotilla attack
>DOZENS of torpedoes in the water
>none of them hit, Brit capital ships dodging like Neo
>Brits somehow torpedo a DD and CL in return
You cannot convince me that the AI is not the biggest cheating Black person in the world when it comes to torpedo warfare.
What year was it?
1923
they key is to have enough destroyers with enough torpedoes in the water that no matter how hard they manuever they will take hits
The key is to not bother as its all rigged against the player. The number of times I've eaten torpedoes at ranges that my own ships would never even fire at the enemy are too high to count. The number of times that the AI happily trades gunfire with me until I launch torpedoes then they react as if they can see them is infuriating. I learned a long time ago that chasing the AI in bad visibility is suicide but the AI constantly chases me with impunity because they can see my torpedoes but theirs are invisible and used far more competently than my own AI ships ever could. The player can be better at gunfighting and air battles than the AI, better to focus on those since a human player can never match the AI in torpedo effectiveness.
thoughts?
https://www.gog.com/en/game/great_naval_battles_the_final_fury
when will we get a dark mode
Same time as we get text scaling options: either never or on rule the waves 9: actual UI edition.
The AI doesn't know when you've fired torpedoes, it's just coded to dodge whenever one of your ships seems like it launched torpedoes. There is a very simple way to test this. Take a destroyer division that has fired off all of its torpedoes already. Have it charge at the enemy like it's about to make a torpedo run. The AI will still try to dodge, even though no torpedoes were launched, because it isn't actually cheating, it's just super cautious.
How do I do effective torpedo runs? flotilla attack isn't cutting it.
I'm also sick of ships dumping ordance on an obviously-sinking DIW.
I started writing a whole essay for you then accidentally deleted it all, so I'll keep this explanation simple. Put your heavy ships right next to your target ships, outside of torpedo range; ideally target B's and heavy CA's. This drives away smaller ships which destroyers are vulnerable to. Then send in only one destroyer division on a path to be in front of the enemy ship. Only one division because other divisions will block each other from firing torpedoes. You want to have them very close, about half the radius of the torpedo range at least and in the path that the enemy ship is moving so it is high speed and they don't have any time to turn. I use captain mode to manually fire torpedoes, but the AI will still reliably fire them with this strategy. The whole enemy division will likely swerve to avoid being hit, but the ship you were aiming at will very likely be hit as you are moving in a line division and each destroyer gets a chance to fire. Avoid colliding with the enemy ship, and keep the big ships in pursuit of the targets. After the first ship is hit, go after the second, and so on until you are out of torpedoes, then disengage with your destroyers. The goal is to do a fast hit and run to minimize losses, though when you do lose some, they are just destroyers. If there are no more targets left, disengage the big ships as well. If there are, then send in another destroyer division, rinse and repeat, then disengage all ships and shadow the enemy. At this point they will be crawling away with their crippled flag ships. If your force is big and fast enough, finish off the cruisers and other ships. If not then just go back to port and call it a day.
As Germany I absolutely stomped the British and French, in two separate wars, employing this strategy.
Thanks anon. I'll give it a shot. When you say target ships, are you saying use screen roles or some ships as bait?
I think my game is bugged. It's 1929, every nation in the world has aircraft with some building CVs, and I haven't even had the research path pop up. All my research is set to low to try and let it fall out, but it won't.
Oh, I meant the enemy ships you are targeting, so B's or heavy CA's. You want to keep your big ships close to the enemy ships you are planning on torpedoing to drive away the cruisers and destroyers as well as to draw their fire to minimize the loss of destroyers. What is your research spending at?
Oh, I gotcha. If the enemy BB line is sailing East, and my line is sailing parallel in the same direction, what's the best way to maneuver the DDs?
Research is at 12% and I'm "Very Advanced". I'm considering editing the save file.
Generally from the same side that your ships are on in front of the BB, and leave on the same side as well. You are using your ships to draw fire away from your destroyers when they approach and when they leave.
I love how the AI tries to match and outdo the player even when the player is being moronic. Made 26kn BCs that had more armor than BBs but with shit guns and the AI made even thicker with even shutter guns so had the 1880 META of shooting at eachother for 2 hours doing nothing brought back.
>another FRICKING night coastal bombardment
Honestly I just turn my ships around and go back home
Any tips on maneuvering and fleet formation/roles?
I feel like the AI is attached to my fleet with a rope. Any move I make, they reciprocate, and battles looking like a bunch of swarming bees flying randomly vs nice clean battle lines I see in pics.
Crossing the T, for instance. Is it actually worth doing? It seems easy to "not get crossed" by simply turning, which battleships flip right into position.
How did I flash fire a turret with a 3in hit to the top from ~3k yards?
that's why you don't play Britain
Concur; Britain was the AI.
More of a question about mechanics, since I thought 3" had zero pen. Would the AI leave the tops of the turrets completely unarmored?
Splinters can penetrate armor <2 inches, and this a 1890 ship so it possible it has very thin turret roof armor.
Why didn't this torpedo blow that CL out of the water? Just sailed straight down the middle.
Sometimes torpedoes swim too deep and miss the boat.
sounds like a reliability problem, they should add some kind of magnetic detonator to fix that
There's a tech for that, you might not have it yet.
sounds great
If you go into the Doctrine, on the left under torpedo usage, you'll see it. It's a toggle, and I think can come with it's own problems early on
Anyone know how the economy works in this game? I'm playing as Germnay and have taken over all of Africa, the Med, Venezuela, and a load of the Far East and yet I'm trailing behind the US by the mid 40s. Is there anything I can do to massively boost my economy?
The US always becomes a gigantic rapemachine no matter what you do. Colonial possession income starts dropping off later in the game. I think it's better to just have enough colonies for basing, then always take economic concessions from wars.
Taking colonies isn't worth it, if you want a big economy take reparations instead. Just invade colonies, there isn't really a need to take them in peace deals.
The US has "Rapid Economic Growth" I believe the only non-modded country to do so. Basically, when you get the "New Technologies have led to economic growth" or similar event, you get a flat increase to your nation's annual production, a portion of which becomes your budget. The US, with its bonus, gets an additional % increase every year, and I think later in the game, after 1920, might get two flat bonus's every year as well. This makes it very hard to keep up with them, even as Britian.
As the others say, getting a colony will help out, but it's very limited in comparison to native growth. You may take a couple colonies worth 10 or 20, but I believe the yearly growth is 350. Reparations, on the other hand, can give you +100 or more.
Can I ditch colonies somehow? I'm playing as Germany and maintaining Pacific Fleet shit is annoying, especially under a treaty.
Well, not really, unless there's a rebellion or you lose a war. On the other hand, as
said, without colonies you can run into a situation where you can't actually base any ships in a region, so it's still needed. Do an A-H run
>destroyer fleet tied to line of battleships
>destroyers speed ahead at 28 knots
>battleships sit at 22
>destroyers proceed to speed forward, turn around and go to the back of the ship
>destroyers proceed to move up to the front again
Does anyone know how to get the destroyers to stop being on meth and just slow the frick down
rear admiral mode
Bros, wrapping up my first campaign, and holy shit does it really turn to ass when aircraft take over.
How do I manage CAP and non-stop strikes on the enemy fleet like they are all night? I can never find their CVs, even going after the blue flags.
Assign squadrons as Night capable. It costs more.
I've decided to experiment with narrow belts and minimal armor on big casemate'd secondaries. This will be amazing or a disaster.
I haven't quite understood casemates vs turrets: is the tradeoff that a casemate gets to be "more armoured" even if it has a thinner armour, and then has a limited firing angle? Or are casemates just worse in general in every way
Casemate armor helps protect the belt and are lighter than single turrets while having the same firing angle, but that they can get swamped by water in bad weather, can only hold 1 gun each, and can't use dual purpose guns.
They also don't get the low tech small turret RoF penalties.
When you put your secondaries in casemates, how much armor do you need to add? Does the 2" rule still apply? I've been pulling armor down to 1" or 0 when using casemates.
Yes, unless they are over 6", in which case you want to armor them more, as they can flash-fire the whole gundeck.
Are secondaries ever good for anything aside from puting some preassure on a DD somehow avoids the CL screen and being made DP once the tech comes online? It’s called all big gun battleship after all I just put like 10 five inchers in casemattes and that’s all.
they are useful to keep lighter ships at bay, you can get away with placing a few 7-8inch casemates on your BB's and they will be useful to get rid of most CL's
As the game goes on I like to place 6-7inch double turrets on my BB's and BC's so they can defend themselves against quick CA's and they end up being useful when fighting other capital ships (Causing fires, disabling aaa and secondaries, etc.)
I feel like it’s almost mandatory to play captain mode on this game so you can launch your own torpedos. The enemy AI will launch a shit ton at me and pull off some serious trick shots but my AI won’t launch any unless the enemy boat is rendered immobile.
>in my opinion it's necessary to play on the easiest mode lest the game be insufficiently easy
yeah
I figured captain was supposed to be hard mode since it gives you victory point penalties.
How much is the AI behavior affected by country/officers if at all?
>I figured captain was supposed to be hard mode since it gives you victory point penalties.
That should've tipped you off that it's the easy mode, lmao moron. Usually playing on harder modes gives more points in videogames.
Stop being such an elitist, dude. Admiral and Rear Admiral aren't harder, they are simply different play styles. It's not hard to just let the AI control all your ships. People choose to play Captain because the AI is simply moronic, that is all. When your battleship charges into a pack of destroyers and light cruisers or a ship simply refuses to launch its torpedoes when it is fully capable of doing so, you have to approach battles in a different way, a way in which many people don't find all that fun. Certain strategies that would be viable with a competent controller are not with AI, like using torpedoes, or lighter cruisers as the AI will inevitably do a death charge into a larger force, get them hit by a torpedo, or just run away like a coward. I like having all those options open to me, I can't rely on the AI to allow that, so I play on Captain mode.
You fricking Black person, all you just said is that Captain mode is indeed easier. That's why using it gives a point penalty.
You are dense, aren't you? You get less points not because it is easier, but because you have more control over your units. It's not more difficult to let the AI have control of your units, to employ different strategies and build different ships is not more challenging. No amount of skill on your part will stop the AI from being moronic, so how can you say it is a higher difficulty when experience with the game makes no difference in a battle's outcomes? Rather, they are different play styles.
>not because it is easier, but because you have more control over your units.
IT'S EASIER *BECAUSE* YOU HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER YOUR UNITS. AS YOU FRICKING SAID: YOU'RE USING THE MODE LITERALLY BECAUSE THE AI FRICKS THINGS UP. IT'S EASIER. THAT'S WHY YOU'RE USING IT AND THAT'S WHY YOU GET LESS POINTS, AS IS OFTEN DONE IN VIDEOGAMES.
man I wish UA:Dreadnoughts wasn't such a half-complete mess
It is, but at the same time, I still enjoy it. I started with RTW3, went to UAD, and just came back to RTW.
Playing UAD actually helped me understand different parts of ship design and ship's roles a little better. Gave me the foundation to bettwr visualize RTW, I guess?
yeah, it has potential but there's still a lot to go to even compare with RTW...
the no aircraft thing really does it for me but the UI, pen and armour mechanics, gun calibres, etc have so many issues that it ends up piling on and dragging everything else down
A colony the British took from me in the early game just got oil.
How do your build your fleets?
What roles do the different divisions get?
Should all BBs be in the same division?
Should CAs be core or screen?
Should CLs support or screen?
Ditto for DDs.
A lot of time my formation looks like a mess if DDs are on screen, and they foul the range. CLs do it too, though.
>It's not more difficult to let the AI have control of your units
>No amount of skill on your part will stop the AI from being moronic
maximum doublethink
Sorry dude, knowing you are a knuckle-dragger I should have taken more time to explain instead of assuming you are capable of comprehending simple concepts.
The limitation of the other modes is the stupidity of the AI, it is not difficult to work around, you just have to use different ships and strategies. Your skill does not impact the AI's performance, therefore it is not a matter of difficulty, again, it is simply a different game mode.
Listen here you great ape, the AI only messes things up if you use the same ships and strategy as you do on Captain mode. Now, I wouldn't put it past you to be that special kind of moron that watches his ships get blown out of the water and doesn't change a thing. However, reasonable individuals will find that the other modes require a completely different approach in ship composition and strategy. Additionally, how are you comparing gameplay difficulty between a mode in which you have complete control over the ships and one in which you have none? It is an entirely different way of playing the game. Not even the manual mentions difficulty when talking about the different modes, it says that the points are reduced because there are less limitations. Do you get it now, you neanderthal?
LET NEPTUNE STRIKE YE DOWN, Black person! HAAAAARK!
HARK TRITON, HARK! Bellow, bid our father the Sea King rise from the depths full foul in his fury! Black waves teeming with salt foam to smother this moronic Black person with pungent slime, to choke ye, engorging your organs til’ ye turn blue and bloated with bilge and brine and can scream no more -- only when he, crowned in wienerle shells with slitherin’ tentacle tail and steaming beard take up his fell be-finned arm, his coral-tine trident screeches banshee-like in the tempest and plunges right through yer gullet, bursting ye -- a bulging bladder no more, but a blasted bloody film now and nothing for the harpies and the souls of dead sailors to peck and claw and feed upon only to be lapped up and swallowed by the infinite waters of the Dread Emperor himself -- forgotten to any man, to any time, forgotten to any god or devil, forgotten even to the sea, for any stuff for part of the moronic Black person, even any scantling of your soul is Anon no more, but is now itself the sea!
Yeah captain's mode isn't easier.
>sends 40 suicidal destroyers straight into the enemy battle line to launch full torpedo spreads
You just use different strategies.
Torpedoes aren't viable in anything but Captain's mode, I specifically mentioned that. Please try to improve your reading comprehension beyond a third grade level.
They are plenty viable on rear admiral. You just need to be few techs in.
That's fair enough, torpedoes certainly do become more of a viable strategy for the AI later in the game. However, I was referring to the AI's handling of torpedoes in the early game as an example of the need to change your strategy in the other modes. Of course strategies change as the game goes on, that is the whole point of the game. Not only do you lack reading comprehension, you lack major critical thinking skills as well. I am seriously beginning to doubt the full development of your frontal lobe; what's your IQ, sub 90, sub 80?
Are you going to repeat the same points over and over again you mongoloid? I can only say the same thing in so many ways. Take a break from your bagging job and go to night school you 9th grade dropout. In a few years come back and read through this thread, maybe then you'll get it. This is a stupid hill to die on, and a stupid argument all together. Would you just shut up already?
Clearly I'm not the only one who thinks your explanation for your brainfart is fricking moronic, lol.
The initial thought of captain mode being the "hard mode since it gives victory point penalties" was a brainless idea to begin with, and you doubled down from there.
Nah, that wasn't me. I was just calling you out for trying to be an elitist. But, congrats, you managed to out yourself as a class A moron as well.
Okay, you defended someone else's silly statement with a moronic argument then 😀 My bad.
If I can move my pawns like queens, it doesn't make it easier to beat a normal chess player, it just means that I use a different strategy and take his pieces much faster, btw. It doesn't affect the difficulty.
They are plenty viable on admiral, just have more torpedo tubes than the enemy and be beyond the 1910s.
Sounds like you have a skill issue
g-g-g-g-g-g-goodbye
Legendary difficulty in Halo is not any harder than Easy, you just have to use different strategies, like taking cover, and you kill the enemies slower. I don't understand why the game gives me more points for using that game mode though...
Hey guys suiciding torpedo destroyers into the enemy's Bs for maximum victory points (minus 20.000000 (repeating of course) percent) is a complex strategy and no more or less difficult than any other. If you can't understand that, you're a 100-IQ (minus 20.0000000 (repeating of course) percent) mongoloid.
Well, that ends this run. I see why the game ends in 1970, because missile combat isn't that well developed. I usually do manual targeting of the opening salvos, but I had so many I figured I would just let fire at will do it's job. The entire fleet dumped on a DD misidentified as a CV.
>no VP penalty
How is easy mode treating you?
Or maybe several people read your braindead posts about difficulty and responded :O
>no you're the moron, says the guy who thinks the mode that gives you full control over the AI is somehow not easier
Hopefully you guys are done shitting up this comfy thread. For my part, the "different tactics" required by Admiral mode are harder because of the ships act moronic, like maintain full speed after torpedo hits and worsening flooding.
Anyone else seek out treaties? I like having the limits in place to force unusual designs. I wish they would persist somehow into a war.
I tend to seek them out mostly when I can see that the AI is building a lot more caps at the time and I need to ruin their days. Though having treaties still stay even during a war would be worse than useless at that point since the other guy would just ignore it afterwards and start tossing in new builds to ruin your day.
I guess treaties make the early war a bit different. It makes rebuilding considerations a lot different, which I like.
My two runs, I've skimped on deck armor (like 2", maybe 2.5" max) and never came to regret it. Same with narrow belts. How do people get functional ships with 6" decks? Where's the weight being pulled from? I've focused on keeping heavy belts and BE. Maybe 11" belt, 6" BE if I can swing it.
I like the idea of treaties but I don't like that they depend entirely on my [player] input. Little Austria-Hungary over here dictating whether or not there will be a treaty, the terms of the treaty, etc.
Well, it proposes terms, and your changes are not always accepted I believe. I really like treaties personally, and will Save Edit to continue them occasionally. if you can get a treaty to last from 20' to 36', you can get the WW2 feel of old BCs running against new fast BBs.
Whatever nation I play, I just end up fighting battles in my home area because I need my fleet there to not get blockaded.
That's fine with Spain and Italy in the med, but as Germany it was just English Channel and Baltic engagements the entire game.
Any tips to fight elsewhere?
Depends who you are fighting I suppose. Playing Germany though, I've found that no matter what, if you are fighting a superior fleet like the French or the British, you are going to get blockaded. However, a blockade can actually be quite the advantage for you, as you are the only one that can raid. So if you build a lot of fast, long range, less armored raiding ships, along with submarines, you can build up a lot of enemy unrest. Do a lot of destroyer spam and you can also manage to sink a lot of their capital ships and break the blockade. So, don't fear a blockade too much.
All that being said, of course most battles are going to take place near home when fighting European powers, that's where they are going to station most of their navy. What I do when fighting someone with a lot of colonies like the British or French is put some older CA's, CL's, KE's, and some destroyers on my foreign stations and occasionally you will get a smaller battle there, sometimes a bigger one if they try an invasion.
If you really want to fight a big battle abroad then go after the Japanese, the Americans, or the Russians (half their fleet is in Asia). But where you fight is going to largely be dependent on where you have bases, as having ships somewhere where you have no bases causes them to have a lot of disadvantages. Thus you want to either get bases near those areas or get an ally who already does. In my current Germany run, I am at war with the Japanese. I have a base in China and an American ally who also has a base there. So, I was able to station a sizable part of my fleet there, all of my newly built, advanced ships. Have been able to sink all but one of their capital ships, all they have left is a whole lot of KE's and some submarines and destroyers. Honestly, quite fun fighting abroad, might go after Russia next.
I think flakk CLs might actually work. I’ve seen HAA kill aircraft and my ships suffered a lot less damage from airstrikes than expected with these things around.
Every time I refit a ship the class name gets the refit year appended so I wind up with class names like "Penis (R 1900) (R 1912) (R 1925)". I'm pretty sure that in RTW2 it just put the most recent refit on there. How do I keep from stacking all these refits on the end of the class name?
How are you supposed to counter enemy destroyers past 1910? With better torpedo tech, how are you supposed to stop them from torpedoing your capital ships, more small calibre guns on capital ships, more destroyers, KE's? Speaking of which, I'm in 1909 right now, why are there countries building a bunch of KE's right now?
During a war the AI will "build" lots of KE for ASW and for raiding.
Destroyers are a huge pain. The correct answer should be light cruisers set to screen the capitals as they should theoretically be swatting destroyers easily, but in reality they tend to hide behind the capitals (from the enemy capitals) and torpedo ranges get so long by ~1915 that the only real answer is to zigzag constantly. No amount of 4-6" gunnery on your capitals is going to keep a destroyer from scoring a torpedo hit if you keep driving in a straight line.
I don't know how to get the light cruisers and destroyers to stay in between the battle lines and have their mini war like Hipper and Beatty intended.
That makes sense. I just ended my war with Japan, all tensions dropped and every nation suddenly scrapped their KE's. Thanks for the advice. Anyways, German Hokkaido.
The real answer is to chad charge your capitals to the enemy line while ordering DDs to perform assault and blast their dreadnaughts point blank. AI will almost always panic and try to run even from inferior force dispersing its ships giving you oportunity to pick a target and finish it it off. Sure you will lose DDs and some of your capitals will get severely damaged, but the enemy is gonna lose a capital or two.
This.
>last war as CSA against France and Spain in 1935
>4 big 32kn BCs
>always close down to point-blank
>armor is irrelevant, speed is armor
>ramming DDs
>14in fire straight through French BBs at 4000 yards
>turn the windward passage into Iron Bottom sound
>at least one BC in the dockyard with torpedo damage the whole war
>even hit a fricking mine off Port-au-Prince
>CSS Cofederation took 26 torpedo hits over the course of the war
>sink every Spainish BB and a third of the French fleet
Damage control training is a hell of a drug
Phoneposting from work has done me dirty again, only 16 hits, and I mixed up my BCs from a different run. Either way, here's the current half of CS Confederation's tribulations, all in the pursuit of running down enemies and scattering them, leaving them for the support to mop up. I don't think it is a lucky ship though, her sister has more hits and less damage in every engagement.
And yes, I'm going to lose this war, and yes, Brazil has the strongest Navy in the world.
This game taught me whenever you see in the news some headline playing up scary new Chinese technology it’s because the Navy wants money for some new toys and prestige, more so than the actual threat. I do it too, the Spaniards are going to come and kill us all unless you help me build more 90,000 ton battleships.
>Mein Kaiser…the Russians are putting torpedos in the skies!
>first to unlock heavier than air aviation
>first to build a carrier
>first to have a division of converted CVLs
>first to have a division of proper CVLs
>first to have a division of decent converted CVs
>first to have a division of proper CVs
>between 1920 and 1930 fight a war with Germany and huge pseudo world war with France/GB
>my carriers get spawned into 5 battles
>can only launch planes in 3 battles
>no torpedo hits
Hate this game sometimes.
Could be worse.
>turn on slowest tech and slowest air development
>get heavier than air 15 years after everyone else
>get pop ups making fun of me for using blimps all the time
>everyone else has gigahomie carriers
>battleships are now just floating AA platforms
>finally get heavier than air
>only ground-based squadrons get used because lmao russia hates me
New to this, saw a video about seems pretty cool.
Just some questions, how can the devs justify price tag of 39€?
Do you also assign captains to every ship?
Is there ever manpower shortage?
Is true that battles are just random, where you told X amount of your ships have the opportunity to attack X amount of enemy ships?
-No idea, I didn't buy it. It's pretty good though.
-You can or the AI can do it for you.
-No, I do not believe so. Maybe there is an event or something for it, but I doubt it
-It randomly selects ships that are in an area where a battle takes place, different ships for different types of battles. It takes into some consideration the divisions you put your ships into. You can also decline most battles, at the loss of a small amount of war score and, if you do it enough times, prestige.
Also, how are inland areas like Moscow handled?
It is a navy sim dude, they are handled very simply. Homeland territories generate a certain amount of money, and they can't be lost in wars. For the purposes of the game, each nation is just a set of ports with a country attached; the rest might as well not exist.
>-No idea, I didn't buy it. It's pretty good though.
I guess I really understand where the budget went.
Yes, it might be extremely detailed, but it still seems to be one man's project. PDX games with 40€ need that price tag to pay itself back because they employ hundreds of people.
Also, what the difference between 2 and 3? They look the same.
3 has missiles, 1890 start, divisions, officers, a few improvements to the ship editor, and some changes to the battle generator.
You make it sound like 3 isn't a new game but just a patch. If so, how can they justify selling it as a new game?
Welcome to the world of niche wargaming. There really isn't any competition for Rule the Waves, nor volume of sale to keep prices down.
If "detailed naval spreadsheet with ship building" catches your eye, it's worth it. Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts is kind of a Rule the Waves ripoff with graphics, but worse AI and a wonky campaign. It's fun but not as deep.
>not as deep.
I liked that the positioning of ships on the world map is more nuanced than just sending selected ships to some sector that covers 1/8th of the earths oceans.
What we need is the more casualized approach to make this main stream.
I'm thinking:
>all admirals are big-boob anime girls
>once you defeat them you add them to your harem
>sex mini game
>you have to win battles to impress your harem girls
>if you lose many battles, your harem girls will call you a loser and escape your harem
Completely wrong
>all admirals are manly men
>they are each other's best bros and you have to balance their relationships like some kind of a moron handler
>sex mini game
>if you lose too many battles they will start drinking and mess up your orders
no amount of cute men is going to make women play a game where you build ships
Here's the comparison document. Either you have RTW2 and you know you want RTW3, or you just get RTW3 if interested.
https://www.matrixgames.com/news/rule-the-waves-3-comparison-document
I liked that part too, but things like the economy are trivial. I literally never paid attention to cost. I like the battles, and seeing things visually while building ships helped understand some things about RTW a lot more. I started with RTW3, went to UA:D, then back to RTW.
>people using 5" deck armor
I'm never using over 2" because deck armor is a waste. I've also been up gunning DDs with 6" guns, dropping TPs to 1 tube, and running them in close to punish and slow fleets. "Heavy Destroyers" have actually been great.
>https://www.matrixgames.com/news/rule-the-waves-3-comparison-document
Any other company would call that expansion or free patch
bump
Not paradox
>I didn't buy it.
Out of curiosity (and I'm asking this because I want to sell my own game at some point), you didn't buy it because you considered 40€ unreasonable? If so, would you have considered buying it if its price was only 10€ or 5€? Or are you one of those guys who wouldn't have bought it even if its price was 1€?
I didn't buy it because I wasn't even too sure if it would run on my system at all. I use a mac, so I have to use wine to run certain games, which doesn't always work, and when it does often times it doesn't run very well. In addition to that, I've never played a game like this before, so yeah 40 bucks was a bit hard to justify for a game that, even if it works, I might not like. All that being said, once I'm done with my first campaign, I probably will buy it.
Respectable stance, regardeles...
>Wine
Why not Proton?
Proton is Linux though, right?
Proton is built on WINE, so shouldn't it in theory work with Mac?
Proton is a modified version of wine that Mac dropped support for a good while ago.
Is there a LOGH mod?
Think this game might be more faithful to it than something like Stellaris.
Would a Deutschland-class design work in RtW?
The Belt is actually 3 inches, but otherwise this design is accurate. I'm coming up on the 1920's in my Germany campaign soon, might try it out.
Can anyone explain why TRs can move at almost double speed before you identify their ship class? Feels so weird to be in an extended stern chase with an unidentified ship in the dark only to instantly overtake it as soon as they identify the class.
Yeah, the identification system is a bit funny sometimes. I've had a battle where, during a day with great visibility, my guys mistook a destroyer for a light aircraft carrier, before airplanes were invented.
I'm really not sure what I am supposed to be prioritizing here, any tips?
What year is this? Either way, you should use superfiring turrets if you have them, and you can't use Q turrets with wing turrets like that, although maybe that limitation is only with cross-deck fire. At 50,000 tons I'd like something more than a broadside of 10-12" guns, I'm pretty sure you can get that on 30,000 tons and then build two ships. I personally wouldn't use 8" secondaries on a BC, get a bunch of 5" and 3" or 4" if you want Tertiary. BCs are always running though, either running away, or preferably chasing down a target, so the more guns that can fire up-front the better. With this arrangement, you're going to have to run up alongside an enemy BC to bring your guns on target, which will take a lot of time and burn the 95 shots of your 2 forward guns out well before the rest of your battery gets in range. If you only have 4 centerline guns, it might be best to just go for A-B-Q/Y-X, up the shells to 120 or so, drop the secondaries down, keep the speed and armor, then see how small you can make them with the left-over weight. That way you can build more of them.
Germany 1915, what are superfiring turrets, I can as long as its not crossfire, would 14" work? That's one of the things I've been confused on, do I build the biggest and best ships possible that fulfill a task very well, or build multiple that fulfill the task fairly well? So far I have been doing the former with my battleships. For a good while my fleet tonnage was so far below the other major nations that I couldn't match their numbers, so I prioritized quality over quantity. Now that I have surpassed all but the British, I'm just haven't been sure which is best really.
I have the tech, but I can't have the level of TPS and triple turrets for the A or Y positions at the same time. You would think, but I don't have elevation gear yet, so there is an ROF penalty. If I reduce the caliber below 5" then I can't have triple turrets. 10", that seems a bit low, and I mean I would rather my rudder not be taken out, which seems to happen every other battle for at least one ship, though for sure lower the deck extended, never really knew what that was.
Then do something like this
and go with 2 then three, A-B is better than A-C every time
I suppose what I mean is that the only advantage that I have over the British is that my ships are better. I can't beat them in a numbers game, so I try my best to beat them in quality. That being said, it probably is a bit too big.
Not a bad idea, thanks, taking some ideas from there.
How does this look? I'm fairly happy with it. I'm not sure with those 14" guns though, could make them 12" get rid of some of the secondaries and make the ship 42,000 tons. Honestly, just not sure how well it would perform.
It's a lot better, imo, 6 guns forward is great.
Superfiring turrets weigh more, so, if you want 4 guns up forward... you'll save weight by putting them on turret A.
I'm not a huge fan of the midships turret. I'd rather take that off and up-gun one of the other turrets.
You seem like you're probably around 1920-1930, depending on tech speed, so I wouldn't drop down to 12" guns on a BC. I doubt it would be effective.
50000t is.. really big to only have 14" guns and a 12" belt at 30 knots. Bigger guns are more than just range, they do more damage. Lots of people cap at 16", but the first time I fought a ship with 18" guns, it wrecked me so fast I was stunned. I built a 5-gun 18" BB (about 40k tons @ 27 knots) and it runs the streets.
I don't think you need that many 3" tertiaries, if any.
You don't have oil? I would hesitate to build this ship when you have secondary directors unlocked but no oil/turbine. Coal is to be ditched ASAP.
Armor over 2" for secondaries should be a deliberate choice. 2" offers splinter protection and after that you're armoring for direct hits, which is heavy and may not protect them anyway.
I guess. I'm not defending it. If I had started with RTW2 I might have an opinion, and while I wasn't a little skeptical when I bought it, I've found RTW3 to be completely worth it.
I don’t have the tech to do that at the moment. Is broadside fire not good to have? I’m in 1915, don’t have oil yet. I could up it to 15”. Noted, I really don’t get the difference between tertiary and secondary guns, they can be the same caliber and the tertiaries still weigh significantly less, why not just add one 6” secondary turret, and max 5” tertiary turrets? I’m supposing there is some kind of penalty to that I am not aware of. No oil yet, maybe I should delay this, wait till planes come around, but at the same time I really want to see this thing dunk on the British weakling 30,000 ton BB’s. I mostly just wing it with armor, still learning how it works.
Tertiary guns are never armored. Not sure if the secondary director affects their accuracy. Later on, when AA and missiles become important, you'll be fighting for topside space more than weight.
Tertiaries also don't suffer the ROF penalties like secondaries do.
You can drop to a single gun and have a bunch of 5" like you mentioned, but the 6" gun would be basically useless because of the small salvo size negative modifier.
I think small salvo is applied to less than 3 guns firing, but it may be 4.
For secondaries, that means 6 or 8 total needed since only half fire at a given time.
What's the weight difference if you redistribute the guns a bit from the superimposed fwd and aft?
So what would be the problem with something like this? With these secondaries and tertiaries, getting rid of some of the turrets can get me down to 37,000 tons.
Secondaries have a director, tertiaries do not (* at this tech level, apparently). Stack some 5 or 6 inch secondary guns and get rid of the tertiary guns, your capital ship can let cruisers and destroyers carry the 3 inchers.
Ignore the other guy, he's telling you that 6" is worthless and then saying that you should go all 6" in the next sentence. He has no idea what he's talking about.
I was saying that 4 6" guns in casemates, in that configuration, with 24 5" tertiaries, that the 6" guns would be useless. 6" guns are great.
In this design, I'd stack one or the other. Make your secondary the 5", or remove the 5" tertiary and add more 6".
Here's a ship where the tertiary battery is 4" DP, primarily for anti-air, and the secondary is 5" for anti-surface action, but only because I hadn't unlocked 5" DP.
There is no "perfect design", otherwise there wouldn't be a discussion. Everything is a compromise, dependent on tech (plus any tech variation), budget, and likely enemy.
Capital ship topside space is best spent on LAA to degrade attacks and maximize the chance of survival, while screens should maximize HAA to shoot down planes and ignore LAA because cruisers and destroyers surviving air attacked is irrelevant (actually it's great because it means they're leaving your capitals alone).
A great plan, assuming everything is in place and you have a large fleet in every battle.
I have never seen a battle where my capitals were included and I didn't get multiple full divisions of CLs and DDs to screen them. I don't think the generator will make battles like that, other than "intelligence coup" where you get to sneak up on an unescorted capital ship.
I guess that depends on the nations you play. I often get a small group of BCs and small group of CLs. Not nearly enough to break up a large attack, or even regularly be on both sides of a BC. Just don't have the budget to field hordes of CLs like Britian or the US.
>don't have the budget to field hordes of CLs
If you don't have the budget to field lots of CLs and DDs, you don't have the budget to be building BCs.
From a meta perspective, the smaller your budget the more torpedoes per hull you should be fielding. Which means more DDs and CLs, and fewer CA/BC/B/BB.
>meta
Sorry, from a minmaxer's powergaming perspective if you only build light cruisers and destroyers you'll only ever control light cruisers and destroyers, and torpedoes make it pretty easy to trade a cruiser and a destroyer or two for a battleship which is sustainable and effective.
>more torpedoes per hull
Frick that. They're useless for the player. Regardless of what the devs say, the AI has perfect knowledge of torpedoes. Try it on Captain. You can be alongside and close to a formation. Hit "fire torpedoes". Observe "high" hit probability.
Don't fire, advance the game a few more turns. You'll notice the AI ships don't move.
Hit "fire topedoes", and fire on any solutions, low or high probability. Regardless, the AI will *immediately* maneuver when you fire. I think player torpedoes only hit on a random dice roll when fired and I'd bet it's only 5-10% max.
High and low are about speed and distance not hit probability. You can see the values when you select a ship in battle under torpedo data where it'll say 700@24/1800@25 where 700 is the high distance and 24 is the high knots. Low is what is shown on the map. I agree that AI ships know where the torpedoes are though but they struggle to dodge 2 at the same time from different ships.
The HI or LOW don't mean high or low probabilities, they mean high or low torpedo speeds, which depends on distance solely. I've found that to hit a ship with a torpedo it has to be slow/standing still or you have to be real close to it. If you want it to definitely hit a ship, get real close, and in its path that way it doesn't have enough time to turn away from it.
High intel can give you events that increase tension, so good if you want to go to war with someone.
>See picrel meme
>I suck at space combat, maybe naval will help
>Remember this thread
>See stuff like
Yeah, I might have tism, but I'm not this level.
Have you looked at Children of a Dead Earth? It's the most realistic you'll get and it doesn't really feel like naval combat. Besides the missiles and drones to actually strike from afar.
At closer ranges both sides are liable to get absolutely fricked once the bullets reach. Lasers help but not always.
Also yes it does run at ½FPS or less if you're shitting out tens of thousands of bullets per second like in this clip. It has to simulate and track them all.
>I don't think you need that many 3" tertiaries, if any.
When the vessel weighs 50k tons I don't think 150 tons of tertiary guns is worth arguing about.
Lots of opinions here but in general it's too big and has too many guns and too much armor.
Delete all but ABY for turrets (make some 3-gun turrets if you have the tech). Increase the rounds per gun to 120 or 150.
For the secondaries, 8" is probably excessive. 5-6" will give you more anti-CL/DD capability, which means more anti-torpedo capability. It seems a bit late in the game for casemates.
Reduce the tertiary guns to 3" or just get rid of them entirely.
If you drop the belt to 10" and remove all the "extended" armor bits, and reduce your secondary gun armor now that it has smaller guns, you'll save a lot of weight.
If you do all this you probably have something like a 36-40k ton ship which will save you a lot of money and heartache when one strikes a mine or the British invent airdropped torpedoes.
>cruiser action: intelligence coup: ambush an enemy vessel!
>enemy forces in area: 1 CA, 1 B
>vs my 2 CA 2 CL
>spawn at nighttime
>unidentified vessel spotted
>oh frick it's a B Charles Martel class with 3x 14" mains, impenetrable armor, etc
>flotilla attack and turn about to save the CAs
>CL throws a torpedo
>ship blows up - magazine detonation
Shortest battle I've ever fought. Turns out it was a CA all along, but it blew up before anybody had a chance to positively identify it. The combat log still shows it as a B.
On the very next strategic turn two cruisers rammed and sunk each other as we were maintaining a straight course without any enemy vessels around, and even though both bombardment targets showed as "sinking" they didn't count as destroyed so I lost all the VP gains I had made.
Do you actually control the ships during battle or is that automated?
There are modes in which you can, captain and rear admiral. You don't directly control their guns, just their movement, who they target, on captain you can launch torpedoes, etc.
but not in vanilla?
Those are difficult levels
No no, it is in vanilla. You get to choose your mode before each battle, admiral mode, rear admiral mode, or captain mode. Admiral and rear admiral put limitations on player control over the ships.
?
>invasion convoy needs to get to the objective
>when they get there they can see a fortification so they scatter instead of staying still in neat lines
>scattering causes them to move within range of the coastal fortification
>they get sunk
>the "littoral movement effect" that turns your ships away from the coastline won't let me get close enough to effectively engage the fortifications
>the time limit is up but because there's an enemy target in sight the scenario won't end
I'm going to lose this battle because my invasion fleet is deliberately sailing within range of a fixed gun position which I can't engage because my ships aren't allowed to get close enough to it.
I fricking love heavy cruisers. My only complaint is that if you make them too fast they're battlecruisers instead. I just want to build more heavy croosers.
So, let me get this straight, if you lose many battles, your government gets taken over by fascists?
So, what happens if you lose 2nd war with fascists in charge? Are they overthrown by communists?
And if the communists lose a 3rd way, do fascists make a comeback?
It is if you gain too much unrest, then your government is overthrown, losing battles is one way to do that. It doesn't always flip to an extremist ideology, it can also become democratic, and events can change your government too.
also, what determines tension? just random events you have no control over?
Events and your responses to those events mostly.
some countries like france also get events for having too large a budget, causing unrest until your budget gets lowered either voluntarily or by force
You could? I think the 6" secondaries would be close to useless.
If you aren't familiar with history, one of the revolutionary elements of HMS Dreadnought (hence dreadnought BBs) was "all big-gun" armament. Rather than a mix of heavy, medium, and light guns, she had a maximum amount of heavy, and then a uniform smaller secondary battery.
You'll notice during battles that "multiple ships firing at target" is an accuracy penalty - this applies to multiple batteries on your ship as well. Early years, accuracy sucks so bad that ROF is king. Later on, it won't be uncommon to see 50-60 main battery hits for your big ships.
I'd probably go full 6" or 5" secondary and ditch tertiary altogether. Probably 6" since you're going big. Before engagements hit 15-20k yards, a good 6" secondary battery can do some work. Nothing ever stops destroyers as quickly as you like, though. Anything over 6" in your secondaries can flash fire, so you have to armor appropriately.
7 or 8" batteries can be good too. That's probably where I'd split some into a smaller 4"/5" tertiary battery for close range.
That's what I don't understand, why not just do what I did here
, get rid of most the secondaries, and just do max tertiary. If I was to put max secondary guns at 5", like I did with the tertiary, it would weigh significantly more. Doing it like I did there, I get far more guns for far less weight, so what is the downside to doing that?
?si=Q_kIokzRLBMGrzJh is a video that helped me understand the gunnery system in RTW. It's worth checking out. I've noticed significantly more main battery hits - especially in the early years -by paying attention to what I learned.
Ah, that's good to know. I still find torpedo-heavy builds to be of dubious use
>I wish some mine sweeping, trade protection, and ASW was abstracted the way submarines are
I could dig this. At least better information on risk from mine/sub attacks in a given area based on my MC/ASW assets. You get a number for each in the area overview tab but I haven't found anyway to interpret or utilize that info.
I assume Democrats spend little money on the navy while communists and fascists spend a lot.
I do wonder how can playing possibly be fun if you don't have control armies.
Can you build an exact copy of Bismark?
No because I'm not a shipyard but maybe you can.
What's a good level to put spying on? Is it only worth it to spy on whoever's ahead in tech?
Tech, sure, but Intel to high on anyone that you're close to going to war on. You need it for the battle generator.
Depends, this dude's analysis says AA is useless, especially by SAM era.
https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/7203/brief-analysis-missiles-countermeasuresHYHXR
The LAA tooltip literally says it's not going to shoot down planes, it's going to degrade their attacks. Which is the most important thing for a capital ship.
He also concludes that planes are useless because they can't successfully bomb any cruisers which means he's moronic.
When do you scrap ships? I don't see the point in updating these early CAs that can never go faster than 23 knots but it seems wasteful to just scrap them.
It's bullshit that the player can arbitrarily set the treaty limits, but on the other hand.
Happened irl with the Washington Naval Treaty, the US had to scrap 30 existing or planned capital ships, Britain 23 and Japan 17.
It’s interesting the game considers current tonnage and shipyard construction tonnage separately. I don’t know if it worked that way in the real naval treaties but I always plan to have my maximum construction tonnage turn into actual tonnage the month the treaty ends.
Can submarines be armed with nuclear weapons?
No nuclear anything in game. Otherwise bombers and heavy fighters and attackers would be armed with nukes as well. Submarines are also side-system that's not involved in the battle system because giving fleet commands to submarines in battle doesn't make sense. Furthermore submarines are underhanded, unfair, and damned un-[x] and you shouldn't use them.
But the game goes until 1970, and ships were armed with nukes since 1951?
So, you can't build billion u-boat and dominate the sea?
I'm really considering buying this, it's 33% off.
But is really worth 30€? Can it possibly provide entertainment for at least 24 hours?
You can still build a bunch of u-boats, submarines just aren't the focus of the game, fleets are. The game isn't for everyone, but it really is fun.
Think back and ask yourself if u-boats have ever dominated the sea.
Has anyone experimented with "David"-type ships? E.g cruisers that prioritize speed over armor and guns.
Is there any merit to speed if you don't have the firepower?
Light cruisers like that are good for raiding.
they don't work that well in combined fleet battles, they leave the rest of the fleet behind and you can't really use them to lead DD's
The only use they have is early scouting (before radar), they can be used for raiding but if you get intercepted you'll have to run away all the time, its better to place them in far away theatres and let them do passive raiding, the downside of this is their fuel consumption which can limit their autonomy and range (they may be interned in neutral ports)
As 1890 Italy, Germany or AH this is something I make. Works better for Italy or AH since they can get away with low freeboards. In fleet battles they wait for an opportunity or until night where they can make a run on their B line. In cruiser battles they can herd their armored cruisers from a distance at 20 kn lowering their endurance while your armored cruisers follow at max -2. Otherwise they can't sink anything on their own and become obsolete in battle as soon as DDs are out.
Hey me too kind of. I designed mine for raiding duty and running away as Germany in my most recent one.
Now in the 1910's they are starting to show their age though. As faster ships have started coming into play.
In-game we call those "destroyers" and the merit is torpedoes.
I wish some mine sweeping, trade protection, and ASW was abstracted the way submarines are. I take zero pleasure in maintaining 30-50 corvettes and obsolete destroyers for these purposes, and having to move the minesweepers around manually to prevent my capitals from winding up in dockyard hands. I play on small fleet size for this reason, I can't imagine medium size.
>want faster max speed on ships
>check speedtable to see how the game calculates speed
>try to calculate with a similar formula the engine ton/hp ratio for all ships up to 90k tons and 46 knots
>type it all into a new table
>ingame ship designer has a hard coded limit of 39 knots
Fml, wish I knew about that bullshit beforehand.
Treading on thin ice right now, as Germany.
Surely America is your Ally, right?
They were for a while, not now, even though there is 0 tension between us. Also, how do you get airships to bomb enemy ships?
Oh come on!
Airships are pretty crap at bombing enemy ships, usually the get used up in scouting missions. I'd guess, expand the base beyond 8 or build basesall over. I have seen them bomb a BB once though, so it is possible
>significant tech variability
>scientists have spent the last 8 years thinking about flight deck washdown, without success
The AI literally always knows where you are and readies strikes at minute 1 of the scenario, launching as soon as they're ready.
Meanwhile the new scenario generator often puts the enemy fleet somewhere other than "generally in front" so you have to do a 360 search to hope to find them.
Beating the AI is easy enough in all other regards, but this is maddening.
>AI cheats
What's new? It's why I won't play some of the War on the Sea mods, too many mechanics that are player only.
I know they cheat, but it removes a lot of the "air" gameplay for me because I have to load my ships up with fighters for CAP lest the enemy DB/TB pop my expensive flat-tops in the first hour of the scenario. That means that on the one-in-ten scenarios where I do find the enemy fleet and it's early enough in the day to launch a strike and the weather allows air ops, my strike is weak and ineffectual because I don't have a strong offensive arm. Normally AI gets to cheat in order to make the game more fun, not less.
I'm considering just not building carriers so the game can't generate carrier battle scenarios.
Skill issue, the AI doesn't cheat, they just send out way more scouting waves that the single default 1 that you send out.
What nations do you guys prefer?
I'm working my way through them and on Japan. Haven't tried GB, France, or China yet.
Spain and AH are basically confined to the Med. Spain in particular kinda sucks because you never develop a budget to get in the fight.
USA felt really isolated.
Germany was fun.
I like France, they're like a budget Great Britain. you have enough starting colonies that you can project power across the globe and fight a wide variety of countries in various zones, but your primary focus is in the North Atlantic/Mediterranean but your budget and tech is mid when your up against the brits and germoids.
Smaller nations, I actually like Spain, but you got to win the earliest war against the US you can fight. Even better if they're salty amd you can walk them again before dreadnoughts show up.
Japan is my favorite. Low budget but you get to fight at home while everybody else fights afield, which is a huge advantage. Clear goals of kicking everybody else out of NE/SE Asia. I love it.
I like Russia. You have the challenge of having to maintain two home regions on opposite sides of the world, poor technology, and little hope of improvement. I look for expansion into Northern Europe and Northeast Asia and avoid all other entanglements.
Russia is fun but it's easy to cheese. In 1890 and 1900 you have the 2nd and 3rd largest navies respectively and can easily just piss of japan, build some 4in guns in port arthur, move your navy before war begins and proceed to rofl stomp the japs hard enough to take Okinawa from them and never have to worry about them being a threat.
Germany is the most fun in vanilla. Confederacy is fun if you're into modding.
>neglect DD's and CL's
brand new CV gets torpedoes 3 months into the war and I have two capital ships in port due to mines
FRICK
I have decided that I will only buy this game, once pass the last uni course. If I buy it before, I end wasting too much time on this game.
How am I meant to use divisions? I initially just made divisions for different types and filled them with those ships but I'm not really sure if this is helpful or useful. It also feels real awkward to have 2 B Division use higher tech ships than 1 B Division
Do I just continuously rotate things out?
I just rotate them out, though it only really matters if there's a huge speed difference.
I leave the divisions in place and rotate the ships through the divisions. The division editor sucks so once I set up the relationships I don't want to touch it again. I also don't do divisions for destroyers, frick that.
I find it useful to group ships in foreign theaters in the same divisions. That way they'll (hopefully) show up together in battle. It's also good for carrier TF's, that way they wont get grouped with random ships and they'll have an adequate escort
What music do you listen when you play?
?t=143
kurds
Missed the sale windows, frick. Next sale in 3 months probably.
https://cs.rin.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=132409&hilit=Rule+the+waves&start=45
Have fun.
Is there a way of seeing RoF? I'm aware that larger caliber guns are slower but I'm not sure how to see it in actual numbers
You see it per ship during battle
damn, I'm not going to retain information that long or be able to compare different calibers that way
Really wish more information was floated in the ship designer (and that you didn't have to continuously press the checkbox to find out if something is valid)