>ctrl F>Rule the Waves>none foundLet's dominate the Pacific as Japan. 1900 start, here's the settings.
Here's our starting fleet, and our starting battleship, a single class of surprisingly decent predreadnoughts. There's a B of the same class and another Asama class CA on the slipways, 10 months out. I've set up the research priorities and doctrines as picrel. We're spying a little bit on everyone and a lot on England and the US, because we're backwards technologically. The Ikis and Asamas are both built in the UK.
>>1090034Here's the starting map and almanac. I had to reduce spying when I realized how sad our budget is. By the end of this game I intend to control the entire Pacific, maybe with naval bases in the Indian Ocean. This will be difficult.
>>1090038Here's the Asama, our starting CA. Also built in the UK, it's also a pretty good design. The double turrets will be unreliable and slow firing at this early stage in the game, but the majority of the firepower is in well armored casemates. It lacks the 8" main battery of a proper CA, but at this state in the game we're going for HE and fires anyways.
>>1090038naval ensigns look better than regular flags
Two important events trigger in the first couple turns, one is a much needed budget increase and the other is rebels in a German colony. That's actually not great, because in this game you can invade and seize colonies from other powers, but capturing a non-aligned colony is entirely chance based. So we want the AI to have colonies, so we can steal them.
>>1090052Apparently our increased military budget spooked the British, despite being about 2% of their budget.
>>1090053We've stolen the blueprints to an Italian battleship. It's the exact same ship as ours, probably built in Britain too because Italy is as shit-poor and undeveloped as we are.
>>1090055If I have a choice in my first war it's against Russia. This is obviously the historical choice, and I want to consolidate Northeast Asia as my uncontested home turf.
>>1090058Just as I put down a couple coastal batteries, Britain wants to sell us 12" guns. Obviously we can't refuse, so a few things will be paused for a couple turns to unfuck the budget, but it's not a huge issue.
>>10900582topical4meabsolutely no hypocrisy in criticizing imperialism from us
>>1090067this is a genuine setback, it's now unlikely we'll be able to ever capture the Bismark Archipelago outside of random events
>>1090055>We've stolen the blueprints to an Italian battleship. It's the exact same ship as ours, probably built in Britain too because Italy is as shit-poor and undeveloped as we are.*two spidermans pointing at each other meme*>>1090058>If I have a choice in my first war it's against Russia. This is obviously the historical choiceI hear the UK has some interesting ideas about centralized directing of fire. They can have some inspirations for future ship designs in return. Might lead to some interesting prototype ships, how does HMS Unafraid sound? Just spitballing, could use some workshopping.
>>1090070Unsurprisingly Germany is building CAs that shit on our CAs. Tension with Russia is rising as desired.>>1090072Keeping relations good with Britain there's a decent chance a tech sharing agreement might happen, and it would be a huge help if it did. I'm only spying on Russia to piss them off, and the Franco-Italians probably have nothing to steal so I don't bother.
>>1090076The Japanese people don't like our overspending. Unfortunately, our current level of spending is tied with Italy and miles behind everyone else. Our CA is finishing next turn and the B has been delayed a few months for budget microing. Should the next run of ships be CLs or KEs? I'll need to build both, our battle line is competent enough for now.
>>1090079Hopefully this pisses off Russia and not the UK.
>>1090081It kinda pissed off everyone. We've got the money to start expanding our docks now though, and another chance to piss off Russia.
>>1090082This might reduce our budget, but I'm going to try to sign an alliance with the UK. Dragging them into the war against Russia would make it almost trivial.
>>1090086No dice. Time to start designing our CL, though.
>>1090081Japan conducting gunboat diplomacy? That's a new one. Commodore Perry must have left quite the impression.
>>1090090Alright, so this is a slightly odd design. We have shitty 6" guns and alright 5 and 8" guns. Most people would see that and build a 5" armed CL. I've gone the USS Olympia route instead. Twin A and B twin 8" turrets. We get a 10% rate of fire penalty on them because we lack reliable gun mountings for guns this size in double turrets, but it's not as bad as the 40% penalty you get for turreted 6" guns. We have a heavy secondary battery of 5" guns because the primary purpose of CLs in my opinion is bullying enemy CLs and DDs. They're in casemates with 2" of armor, which adds a non-trivial amount of protection to the ship (casemates convert hull hits into secondary battery hits, effectively covering that area with 2" of armor in addition to the protected turtle-back)We've also got six underwater torpedo tubes, two to a side and fore-aft launchers. Early fights almost always degenerate into shanking distance. The entire ship is armored to be splinterproof. We're also proof against (poor quality Japanese) 6" guns beyond 8 kiloyards.
>>1090099>22kn on a CL>8in guns on a CLWhy u ghey?
>>1090099We can afford three of these ships. The downside to my clown fiesta baby CA is that they're expensive for CLs, I could probably have built four or five conventional 4,000t 5" armed CLs for the same price.
>>1090100https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Olympia_(C-6)22 knots on a CL is kinda shit but it's 1901 on 80% tech rate, it's not exceptionally slow for the era.
>>1090105Do you plan to have a separate raider class or are you just gonna accept pain.Cause I would at least make a limited run of 24kn Long range 5in CLs with no or few torps.
Looks like we might end up going to war with France instead of Russia. That's a worse war for us but probably winnable. France has 9 battleships to our 5 and 5 CAs to our 2, but they have to come halfway around the world to fight me.
>>1090109Might wanna reduce spying on Russia now, don't wanna start two wars at once.
>>1090108I want to win wars by winning surface engagements and killing enemy ships, I'd rather build submarines for raiding if I'm going for commerce wars. CLs should be able to murder other CLs in cruiser engagements.In terms of tech, we've discovered what damage control is. I've set it to high and fleet tactics to low.
>>1090115France wants an alliance, but I'd rather provoke them and get money. My budget has gone down by over 10k and I didn't get an event explaining why. I can't afford more cuts.
Where the fuck do we get the money for that? I might make some really cheap coastal monitor that counts as a predreadnought.
>>1090119This is Austria tier, but it's legally a predreadnought battleship. That has use both to shut up the Prime Minister and because blockades are calculated on ship class, not tonnage.
>>1090122We're building the shitbuckets. There will be constant delays due to the budget but at least the Emperor will find this most honorabru.
>>1090127I really would prefer a war with Russia over Japan so we're backing off France for now.
>>1090129China event popped again, I'm not going for the most aggressive option but it might still trigger a war.
>>1090134Very nearly at war, but not quite. My budget refuses to go up though, even with super high tensions and taking mostly budget+ options
>>1090138Things are getting a little out of hand now
>>1090139We're laying down a run of corvettes, I'll lay down another 6 when the Naniwa launches next turn. We'll need ships on trade protection.
>>1090145Let's see if the British are serious about an alliance this time
>>1090147Nope, and unfortunately with that event you still take the budget hit anyways.
>>1090151And we're at war with Germany. The good news is we get a surprise attack and can invade Kiautschou Bay. The bad news is Germany outnumbers us 2:1.
>>1090152It's a night engagement, 6 hours until daylight. Most of my fleet is here. With luck, the entire German Asiatic Squadron should be in this port.
>>1090122>because blockades are calculated on ship class, not tonnageWhat the fuck?
>allying with perfidious albion
>>1090153Enemy spotted and engaged, banzai!>>1090156Yeah, any B has the same blockade value as any other B, whether it's an overgrown Lord Nelson with 14" main battery and 16 8" guns, or a coastal monitor with two 10" guns.
>>1090160They never saw us coming, our destroyers are uncontested.
>>1090162The good news is, there won't be any survivors. The bad news is that their Asiatic Squadron appears to just be 3 armored cruisers.
>>1090139Glorious Japanese diplomacy. Makes you wonder what the hell your envoys and ambassadors are doing. A little seppuku to purge the diplomatic corps might be in order.>>1090152>And we're at war with Germany.Intended war with Russia, provoked France, ended up at war with Germany. All according to plan?
>>1090165Final score. These were all 12,000 ton Victoria Louise class cruisers with 9" and 6" guns, good to be rid of them.
>>1090171It will take some time for their doomstack to make it to Asia, but we're outnumbered substantially when they get here. We're also still pissing away money even on a war budget. Tensions with Russia remain concerning.
>>1090172The doomstack arrives and the Emperor remembered he needs to actually pay his navy
>>1090172Didn't Russia have problems coaling up on their way to Japan because UK was giving them the cold shoulder? I can't imagine they'd support the Hochseeflotte (no clue if coaling stations are even modelled in the game).
Fleet battle! We have 5 Bs, Germany has 6 in theater. I like these odds. Unfortunately we have zero (0) DDs becasue the corvettes weren't finished, so we need them all on trade protection.
>>10901763 months? The Brits let them through Suez? What has the world come to...
Enemy spotted. They have the wind advantage and it's a stiff breeze. The Woerth class battleship should actually be the Woerthless class however, I'm extremely confident here.>>1090179from Europe to SEA in four months, the month hadn't ticked over in that picture, they're still in the Indian Ocean.>>1090177If you're over base capacity there's various bad things that can happen to you like being interned for lack of fuel, yes. And base capacity is modeled. Germany does still control Tsingtau though, and can retreat to / coal from it.
>>1090180The enemy scout is a single well armored and well armed CA. However, we outnumber if 3:1 with out overgrown CLs, so I'm going to press the attack.
>>1090181The entire German battle line is Woerthless! Not a gun above 9"!
>>1090182Unfortunately it's 1903, nobody has any fire control technology, and we're fighting in a high sea state, so nobody is hitting anything. Thankfully my battleships are well armored to close to pissing distance of a 9" armed B.
>>1090185Cowardly Germans execute a battleline turnaway rather than face my 12" guns and torpedoes at point blank.
>>1090189They're beginning to scatter, as the German battleline is accosted by CLs hardly any lesser armed than the German Bs. Also, Iki is on fire.
>>1090191Germany has now lost all unit cohesion. Our CLs have closed to torpedo the enemy battleships. Our battleships themselves are launching torpedoes. Everyone's still missing even at pissing distance.
>>1090194One German battleship dead in the water, multiple torpedoed. Iki is on fire again.
>>1090198This one got separated and killed by my CLs. It took a couple torpedoes, and then one just blew it the fuck up.
Two down, four to go. Concerned I may run out of ammo before I run out of targets.
>>1090204Yep that's predreadnought combat alright
At this point we've killed 3 predreads and put a torpedo in a fourth, but we're basically out of ammo.
>>1090217It's not a true Tsushima, but damn if it isn't close.Well done, 提督.
So the final score>CL Unebi torpedoes B Wettin, magazine hit, ship blows up>B Fuji torpedoes B Braunschweig, ship sinks through progressive flooding>B Yashima and B Mikasa torpedo B Worth, sinking it (although the superstructure had largely been blown off by then anyways)>DD Hakaze torpedoes B Brandenburg, 50% flotation damage, limps back to Tsingtau
>>1090220When they fail to even take out that one DD you know they're having troubles. The Kaiser is going to be having fits after this.
>>1090231Six Predreads and an Armored cruiser aren't going to shit going past 20 knots in 1903. I'm surprised the destroyer even got touched, let alone hit that bad
>>1090234Probably got too close to that CA and got pounded for it.
This game looks very soulful, is it hard to pick up and play?
>>1090258You'll definitely need to read the manual and browse the forums and such. It's not intuitive, especially the interface. But it's also not super difficult once you figure out some basics. You can just let the AI design your ships and tweak them how you like, or leave most of your fleet on AI control and only directly command your battle line. I'd say the easiest start is probably Germany.
>>1090179German efficiency la
>>1090220So how goes the war, OP?Did you get your KE's out? Any more battles? Hunt down the rest of the German Pacific Squadron?We await with interest the further developments in the Germano-Japanese War of 1903.
The battle is over and everyone is going back to port healthy and alive, would be a shame if anything happened right?
>>1090292I went and ate dinner, this is the first turn after that battle. We're pressing for harsh terms, what I really want out of the war is Tsingtau
>>1090313The peace treaty is much more generous than I expected, we got enough points to capture every German colony with two points spare for reparations.
>>1090314This is the resulting world map. I'm going to use those two tiny battleships that have been delayed, when they finish, as colonial gunboats in the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia
>>1090315Not much interesting happening in the immediate postwar, I've added six inch batteries to our new possessions and begun designing a new class of destroyer. Do you see torpedo boats?
>>1090314>much more generous than I expectedYou selected harsher peace deals, so you should have expected it.
look mom im playing vidya
>>1090217>but we're basically out of ammo.You've mentioned having "Austria-tier" ships above, might as well ram the enemy at this point to go full Tegetthoff.>>1090315>the resulting world mapTen thousand years! Glorious.
Why aren't these destroyers torpedoing that CA?
>>1090260Thanks. I'll give it a look once I'm home. Nice to know that you can leave the battle to the AI, I'm more interested in designing the ships and developing the navy than actually commanding the battle itself.
Somewhat hijacking the thread but RtW2 won't get an expansion, instead they are releasing RtW3 in october. Apparently the expansion catalog is already outdated due to feature creep/bloat.Also includes a steam release.>>1090115Understandable sentiment but I've always desired my CL killing CLs to be faster than that, although I wouldn't use a design with that speed against DDs either.>>1090360Looks nice, name?
Is there much of a difference between this and Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts?
>>1090680It's finished and you can actually play a campaign from start to finish.In the case of RTW 2 you can go from 1900 to 1975
>>1090528Are they gonna expand the timeline again and we're gonna get 1900 to 2000, or even better 1875 to 1975
>>1090523>>1090525Did you check the box in the orders window to signal a flotilla attack? In my experience DDs don't shoot torpedoes at all unless you do.
>>1090682Atleast 1890-1970, it still has the "Ironclads to Missile Cruisers" subtitle.They were considering adding more post-1970 stuff with the longer development time but nothing specific was confirmed.
>>1090525A stern chase doesn't provide a good shot. Move the destroyers to the beam or ideally forward beam and they'll douse it in torpedoes.
>>1090528>Somewhat hijacking the thread but RtW2 won't get an expansion, instead they are releasing RtW3 in october.That was to be expected. RTW2 was RTW1 + bugfixes and features that were promised in RTW1 but never delivered, so it was logical to assume that the bugfixes and promised features of RTW2 would instead get turned into a "standalone game".
Bumping with my standard legacy CA.>>1091400True enough, the biggest thing is it coming to steam now.
Do you guys wanna maybe do a save relay for this thread?
this game looks intricate and i love pre air naval
>>1090138>3 years in>almost war with germanyWhat the fuck did you do? They don't even have any strategic interest in you!
>>1090528>Looks nice, name?I think it's the game engine development environment and he's not actually coded anything yet.
>>1093967Unfortunately the game can be divided into three eras:1900-1905: large vessels shooting at each other ineffectually until they run out of ammunition1905-1930ish: large vessels shooting at each other until they slow down enough to be torpedoed by destroyers1930ish-fin: aircraft torpedoing large vesselsYou can fuck with the research and budgets and stuff but all you're doing is changing the start and end dates.
>>1091400honestly I don't really care for missiles and helicopters. unless 3 has big improvements to the 1900-1950 era I'll just stick with 2 or wait for a pirate
>>1094309I suspect that the changes will be sufficient enough not to bother with RtW2 anymore.The, by now outdated, expansion catalog https://files.catbox.moe/8xr1a2.pdf mentions things like:>ai vs ai war>ability to choose division composition>movable submarines>dd max size of 3500tI'm quite sure it will be at least worth a pirate.I sure do miss the ability to post pdfs
>>10943093 is going to be free for me until all the options in 2's ship designer are actually functional and not just placeholders. I paid for 2 (less than a year before it was abandoned... how was I to know), I won't make the same mistake with 3.
RTW is an okay game and especially if you LARP you can get a lot of hours out of it. Now the DRM autism literally dying with the storecuck dying (and his flip whorewife and his business partner looting his corpse) is a big step forward. And I'm not going to peck about all the minutia of how many systems are lacking and unrealistic outdated boomer spaghetti code since there is no competitor on the market. But I cannot believe that it will take until RTW3 releases that AI vs AI will be a thing. Should've been a thing since RTW1 and I believe that the previous 2 titles suffered a lot due to that. Navalchads sure have it hard with their lackluster choice of games.
>>1090022RTW novice here, how do you guys keep the AI from just turning tail and running the moment it looks like you might have an advantage? Seems like half my games devolve into stern pursuits that I always lose because the stokers get tired. Or the map spawns me way away from enemy targets and I simply can't survey it in time to catch anything. Is it worth it to skimp on armor/guns to keep speed and guarantee that you at least *get* an engagement, or is there a maneuver I'm not using properly?
>>1090315>Japanese AfricaHideous, but also based.
>>1094301You can just focus on speed in exchange for range and endurance. I twice had a battle fleet that went so fast I could always run down the enemy and keep them in my invulnerability range while they ate shit. Once I had 4 28kn BC with 3x3 AB X set ups that just ran down any opposition.It was fun seeing the enemy react. At first they made really overpowered and poorly armoured BCs to counter and eventually they just made lots of BBs with big guns but not a lot of them.
>>10906831890-19whatever. 80, maybe.
>>1098183Might initiate combat at lower speeds to keep your stokers not-exhausted when the battle is over and you need to sprint.
>>1098070>But I cannot believe that it will take until RTW3 releases that AI vs AI will be a thing.What's really appalling about it is that someone made a mod to enable ai wars and ship losses with some hacky setup.The RtW3 gui is even similar to the mods just without numbers.>previous 2 titles suffered a lot due to that.Definitely, the could only ever lose ships to you making player losses much more punishing in comparison.>>1099003This, cruise speeds before making contact tend to be best to keep the stokers fresh.
If I'm blockading the enemy is it worthwhile to also use raiders and submarines or is the blockade maxing out their unrest per turn?
>>1093828How did you get the colored stacks and signal flags? Is there a mod that adds more to the ship side view maker?
>>1099752it says in the manual that when blockading your enemy, most enemy trade is presumed to have stopped so no, you wont get much benefit out of it.
>>1099773A couple mods exist, the flags should be from CCIP's accessories mod.Worth noting that those need to be accessed through accessories and navigating the folder.https://files.catbox.moe/welmgm.7z is my entire shippers folder.
Should I buy this now or wait until RTW3?
>>1100054>buyHehI'd say pirate, patch to 1.26 because no DRM and wait.RtW3 should release in ~4 months and with the storefront owner passing I think purchasing is still more complicated.
>>1100063Are you suggesting I break the law anon?
>>1100077Would there be anything more fitting than sailing the seven seas for a naval game?
>>1100063Don't buy RTW2, it was effectively abandoned ~2 years ago and officially abandoned in favor of RTW3 several months ago. If you want to pay for a product, wait for RTW3. In the meantime, cis rin ru.
>>1090022Gonna show us what happens next, OP?
Can someone explain base capacity? I'm over base capacity here but both my adjusted tonnage and whatever that fleet strength number is are less than the base capacity. What number is it comparing to that base capacity number?
What do I need to edit to remove submarines from the game? The AI is building them by the hundreds which makes the game boring because there's nothing to fight, and even with several pages of ASW corvettes (on small fleet size) I can't kill them as fast as they produce them.
>>1100739Is it tracking berth size or something? Maybe you have the horizontal capacity but not vertical, can't support something as big as a BB
>>1100853that only happens to me when i quit without saving for a few months. seems like the game updates the ship list every turn anyway whether you actually hit the save button or not.
>>1101021I don't understand what you mean. In that example the game had been running continuously since Jan 1900, I think it's more to do with whatever undisplayed character is there in the name list.
>>1100853>>1101021>>1101087You know how some obscure japanese games tell you to run on JP locale? It's the opposite here, jp locale fucks up special german characters.You can solve it by going into the German name files and removing every special character in it, changing your locale to US or some other or doing the same with locale emulator when starting the game.I did the name edit because its a pain in the ass to keep restarting.Oh also it isn't save compatible.
>>1101087if you open the save folder, you will see that there are a bunch of separate files for every ship class. it seems that when a ship goes into dock to be rebuilt, the game will automatically create a new file in that folder for the rebuilt design. if you then quit the game without saving, the next time you load up the new files will still be there but the game wont recognise them since they technically dont exist in this timeline, leading to the error. i sometimes have had entire enemy divisions disappear at battle start because of this so now i always play ironman. however, >>1101183 seems to be more correct in this instance here
How can I search more effectively? In general I'll only get a report in maybe one in three battles, while the AI will always have aircraft attacking my fleet before my search planes have even managed to fly back. Does the AI just know where my fleets are even if their search pattern doesn't find anything?Sometimes the game will even set up the fleets like in the image, where it won't even be possible for the default search pattern to find the enemy because they'll move out of the way before the search plane arrives. I always thought that in general fleets would be pointed at each other at the start of the battle to give a good chance to make contact.
>>1101686If I recall correctly, smaller range wider radius on turn 0.
>>1090220Are the post battle reports always reliable or is it possible that ships marked as sunk may have survived?
>>1101954It's the exact opposite for the most part, ships that survived till the timer can still die cause they got fucked up too much.
>>1101954The post battle reports are 100% true and correct.
>>1090022Just killed the enemy's only two battleships, so for a force balancing attempt the game spawned my next fight in as a bombardment destroy mission and gave me... 2 destroyers to do it with. In 1904. Literally ran both of them out of ammo without taking the target past heavy damage, set it on fire seven or eight times, but just couldnt kill it despite no enemy opposition and me sitting motionless 5 inches from it. GOD that was some horseshit. At the least, land targets shouldn't regenerate as you try to kill them. Nor should you have a 90% miss rate when neither side is noving at all.
>>1102318Wow and it gets better. This time I have two battleships, neither of which will fire despite having rammed into the coast, because although they have identified the bombardment target, they just wont fire because its dark. We're 50 feet away, and they know what it is. But no boom. Fucking what. I like this game a lot, but it does puzzle me mightily.
>>1102318should have put 6-inchers on your destroyers, that'll do the trick
>>1102323Sometimes if you get too close they'll stop firing because the land is in the way, if you back off a little they'll start up again.
>>1102323>>1102318Honestly I could see this exact thing happening for real. Especially in 1904. Though for reasons the game won't model specifically like it turns out the target was behind a pile of rubble or building materials that was eating half the shell hits, or smoke from fires obscured the target, the shells were bad and kept failing to detonate or deviated too much, the gunners were exhausted and got the angles wrong, the gunnery officers lost their binoculars, that kind of bullshit.>>1102361I don't think you're going to be doing that with 1904 ones which'll be what, 500 tons? 600 if you're lucky and got the advance on that.
>>1090022Is this Aurora 4x but with 1900s ships?
I set all the submarine techs to unlock in 1950. This is how the game was meant to be played.
>>1103062From what I understand of Aurora, no.RtW is far more focused and smaller in scale. You primarily focus on designing military ships and commanding them in battle, all interactions aside from that are quite limited.>>1103070Now you only have to disable airplanes and change the ai build plans to big gun mega BBs
>>1102833Didn't know that, I'll try it next time. >>1102361Wish I could have. >>1102864Yeah, it was a pair of 500 tonners from game start. And for the battleships, I got lucky in that night had just fallen at mission start, and was able to literally sit there the entire night waiting for sunrise lol, then panic-blasted them to victory at like 973/1000 time units or some shit haha.
>>1103062No, this game is actually fun.
>>1103080>Now you only have to disable airplanesIf I could disable airbases I would. I enjoy CV combat.I might change it so only lighter-than-air and floatplanes are allowed, massive (ineffective) floatplane glide-bomb strikes from 20K ton AV could be fun.
>>1103080>>1103105Thanks. I want to play this but I literally don't know anything about ships. I only remember in Civ V, destroyers fight other boats while battleships shoot each other like portable cannons.Then your have CV, DD, BS, BC, and I'm wtf is this? Tbh this sounds very interesting but I can't make head or tails of it.I like looking at ships. The Yamato and Bismarck are of my favorites. There's a French ship, Richelieu, it's very pretty too. It's funny, I don't know about ships, but I like looking at them.
>>1103125>If I could disable airbases I would. I enjoy CV combat.I'll have to check if setting the maxairbase size to 0 would work or if it gets reset like the airbasesize setting.>massive (ineffective) floatplane glide-bomb strikes from 20K ton AV could be fun.Admittedly that does sound kino.>>1103127I'm not sure it's necessary to know that much to start of, most can be learned by playing and losing wars isn't too bad, sometimes I do it to initiate a revolution on my own government.Early game everything is piss poor and no one can hit shit except when it will ruin your day.DDs: fast, cheap smol boats, no armor, torpedoes against big ships and guns against other DDs.CLs: light ships, lots of lighter guns, late game lots of aa and torps too. Quite fast, great escorts, perfect for bullying DDs.CAs: medium-heavy guns, decent armor, can support larger ships or lead small forces, dangerous for CLs.Bs: pre-dreadnaught battleships, slow, heavy armor, large and expensive. Up to two heavy gun turrets and lots of smaller guns.BBs: dreadnought battleships, huge, expensive, lots of heavy/superheavy guns tons of armor.BCs: like BBs but exchange armor for speed.AVs: floatplane tender, can scout with them.CVLs: light carrier, < 34 planes and 16000 tons.CVs: true carriers, >24 knots >35 planesKEs: tiny corvettes for mine laying, mine sweeping and trade protectionAMCs: merchants with guns for raiding, cheap, fast to build, scrapped after warsThe latter two segments can be ignored.Technically I'm oversimplifying it, the game has factors for classification and things shift over time, late game BBs for example make BCs basically obsolete, but that is more than enough info to jump right in.You can create pic related to but it can be quite the effort.
>>1103223Sorry for the late reply. Thanks for your answer. You're kind. I'll try to learn more.
>>1103223You also can replaces DDs with KEs till like the 30s since KEs can have armor
>>1103125I've tried editing a savegame, setting maxairbase to 0. By 1939 I haven't seen any airbases thus far, research rate was at 100%.I think that might be the correct setting but not sure if it will work with the 1920 start and the existing bases.>>1105167>replaces DDs with KEs till like the 30s Huh never even considered that, early game the lack of torpedoes shouldn't matter so they might work as DD killers.
>>1105167If DDs didn't have torpedoes I wouldn't build them at all.
>>1103125>massive (ineffective) floatplane glide-bomb strikes from 20K ton AV could be fun.I experimented with it a little last night. The maximum AV size is 14K which puts the maximum reasonable air wing at about 40 planes. You could do 50 or more but it would be a 10 knot unarmed death trap.The biggest problem is that AVs have no "spot" value so launching a big strike takes an eternity, the enemy will definitely be gone before your planes arrive. I didn't try making a lot of tiny strikes but that might be the solution.The other problem is that the naval air interface is terrible and if you only have a single type of aircraft you can't bypass it and use the "shortcuts" that the game applies when you have fighters/dive bombers/torpedo bombers, such as getting CAP just by changing the CAP radio button or having bombers autoselect a heavy/torpedo load with a naval strike mission as soon as you click the checkbox.
>>1090022How to get into this game if you're not an autist?
>>1105377General question for the thread's more knowledeable people, IS there any point to building destroyers?I keep hoping that if I build enough of them I might get a fight where they do ANY GODDAMN THING other that sit on some FUCKING SCREEN PATH ten miles from where the combat happens, circling around ships uselessly. And even then, if they DO come in and escort the big ships as they should, they never attempt to defend them because the AI never tries to close range!Even if I bring my goddamned battleships in so close my sailors can throw rocks at the enemy, somehow my DDs STILL manage to be nowhere near where they could fire even a single torpedo. Like, I need you fuckers to be a cost-effective way to drop torps into the big boys. If you all die to do so, I don't care. JUST FUCKING FIRE A TORP. You don't fire on offense, you don't fire on defense, you hardly even so much as fire a gun in anger, what is their fucking problem? Are my BB's really supposed to also be my torp carriers? I'm honestly hoping I'm just retardo and not clicking the right button or some shit, lest the programming actually BE that defective.
>>1105659Around maybe 1915 torpedoes gain the speed and range that makes destroyers spam them at anything and everything, prior to that the only torpedoes you're likely to see are enemy torpedoes striking your ships or torpedoes launched against stationary enemies. Once you've confused the enemy battle line a little bit you can select the "flotilla attack" option in the lead squadron's menu to order all destroyers to press the attack and launch torpedoes which they will do to great effect especially if the enemy capital ships are separated from the screens.Prior to ~1915 there's not much point in destroyers because they typically won't launch torpedoes and will generally hang out on the opposite side of your battle line which makes it hard for them to "screen" the battle line against anything. There may be some credence in putting torpedoes on CLs during this time as their heavier guns and armor make them a little more brave.
>>1105674OK, that at least makes some sense, as the only time I have ever seen DD's launch is when my big boys have put enough shells into the enemy to slow them to a crawl. It's just frustrating because at that point I've already won, lol. I don't even need the torps.
>>1105659>IS there any point to building destroyersYes, though for the first war it's irrelevant.Destroyers are the fastest and cheapest ships.I have played most of my games of RTW1 and 2 with a Fast Battle Line set up with no CAs and 2 types of CLs. I usually build about 3 DDs per BB and make up the rest of the light fleet with KEs. In Fleet Battles the high speed of DD means that I always have a screen even if I am doing something stupid with 2 26kn BCs. In Raider battles it means I have a better shot at spotting and killing them.My recommendation for DDs is to make sure they fit your fleet rather than build your fleet around DDs. If you build Torpedo heavy destroyers make sure you have torpedo heavy CLs and invest in fleet torpedo training. And if you have a gunline heavy line, build gun DDs. And get gunnery training.
>>1105659>Why you should always play on captains mode: the postEarly on destroyers exist to fire torpedoes at crippled ships to guarantee a sinking, later on destroyers have an additional task of flooding the sea with torpedoes to fuck up the enemy battle line. But you need to be on captains mode.
>>1105167And it turns out that the battle generator doesn't consider corvettes for escorts in any of my games thus far, making them useless as DD alternative.>>1105584Just start playing, it's what I did.>>1105659The use and effectiveness of destroyers heavily depends on research and settings and there are a few factors behind your experience.Early torpedoes are pretty shit, slow and short range, and DDs will only fire them if they have a good hit chance, meaning rarely against nondisabled ships. This gets better with torpedo research and multi torp launchers. Torpedo training in doctrine affects this as well as sea state, vision and being fired upon.Before researching Destroyer screens as fleet tactics they can only act as support and even afterwards they aren't necessarily set to screen or to screen other formations.As >>1106070 said that's the reason many use captain's mode to fire toros manually. Having your DDs in front and on both sides of the enemy will increase kill chances too.
>>1106428>on both sides of the enemy will increase kill chances too.On both sides is risky because if the DDs think there's a risk of friendly fire they won't launch torpedoes. And then of course there's obviously the real risk of friendly fire if they do decide to launch torpedoes.
>>1106912True, I was thinking of it being viable in captain's mode.Truth be told I mainly use admiral because it's less hands on and I don't mind my DD behaviour most of the time.
>>1106070Yeah, I felt like playing on captain's mode was "I am a fucking casual" tier, but maybe I should, just for sanity's sake.
>>1106985Captains Mode + torpedoes ruins the game. I mean it. You could go into a fleet battle with a proper battle line, or 20 destroyers, and the outcome will be the same.Torpedoes are frustrating in Admiral Mode because destroyers that aren't launching torpedoes might as well not exist, but they're totally overpowered in Captain's Mode.
>>1106985Just do captains mode and deligate what you don't want/think is too gamey.
>>1090022Is it normal when playing japan in the early game to spawn so far away from the enemy during the surprise attack missions that even at full speed, you can never reach the enemy in harbor before they wake up? This has happened to me twice now and it kinda ruins the fun. I know an 18 knot battleship ain't exactly a speedboat, but even a 22 knot CL or whatever couldn't make it in time. Do the suprise attacks just not mean anything until midgame?
>>1108383In the early game destroyers will spawn very close to the enemy in order to execute unopposed torpedo attacks (via the "flotilla attack" command). In the truly early game, like 1900-1910, if you're not playing Captain's Mode then it is probable that your destroyers will just turn around upon identifying the enemy rather than obliterating them with torpedoes as you desire. There's nothing you can do about it, and it does indeed make "surprise attack" pretty uneventful. It still lets you execute an invasion outside your invasion range though which is pretty cool, assuming you "win" the opening battle.After 1930 or so the surprise attack will spawn in the same place but your carriers will be able to launch at an unaware, immobile enemy with all-but guaranteed success.
>>1090022When building legacy ships as a smaller nation, how do you guys usually approach it? Just a couple of the best ones available at foreign docks to buy time until you can ramp your economy, or a larger swarm of trash to try and win through volume of fire?
>>1109510The battle generator favors equality in numbers, which means you need to favor individual quality over numerical quantity. Having 20 trash cruisers instead of 10 good cruisers is pointless when the battle generator will always match up 3 of your vs 3 of the enemy.If you're playing Captains Mode it doesn't matter though, just torpedo them to death.
>>1109510I leave it on auto generate. It makes it feel like I just took over from some other tard.
Have any of you tried to do a Jeune École fleet?
>>1109510Kind of depends on who I plan to fight, what my home area is and what dockyard size I have.In the mediterranean for example I can use short range and low freeboard to safe tonnage and go for cheap indigenous designs.If there is no one powerful I share my build area with I like to go for trashy ships, partially because or allows for more blockade strength if I share my home area with others.Aside from that I only build in foreign docks if they have better quality guns , I try to do something stupid like 13" CAs like >>1093828 or I have an alliance with someone but that doesn't concern the legacy fleet.>>1109897Yeah I like how it's not optimized although the ai can generate some illegal designs.>>1109898Not that I can recall but depending on the tech level it will work really well.Early game torpedoes will be too bad at hitting and DDs will have to few torps.By the time enemy has secondary directors and radar fire control they probably won't survive long enough to fire torpedoes. Although by then aircraft dominate everything.Raiders and submarines are brokenly op in RtW and will always work very well.
Wasn't there a 1.26 crack floating around somewhere?
>>1109510Custom build dumb ships, it's the only way to go
>>1112883No, it isn't needed. 1.26 doesn't have a DRM and removes it from the game.
>>1113299I was trying to find a new installer really, guess I'll just have to email them
>>1113543>trying to find a new installerIf it's just that, this is for (you).https://files.catbox.moe/i2z1mn7z The patch is the normal 1.26 from the forums, just added for convenience.
>>1113572Thanks Anon, you're a real human bean
>>1112933The "Fat Riverboat" strategy, I guess?
>>1113974Yeah, I imagine it as an ironclad ram for harbor/river defense. Too bad ramming isn't properly in the game. Still, I like to build legacy ships representing the ridiculous past, not planning for the future
>>1114755Extremely based design philosophy. I will be sure to visit all the glorious sunken ship memorial sites you produce.
>>1112933>9"beltgood>10x7" and 14x4"very good>only 8ktns and cheapglorious>16 knotsPainI want to like them, especially with that superstructure turret integration but playing those would make me suicidal.
>>1114768Thanks Anon, hilariously they are very hard to sink, unless torps are involved.>>1115190Well, those are technically main battery Casements, I've not found a way to fit a usable turret of 10+ inches on 8000 tones, while still having armor. On 9000-9500 tones though, you can get a very usable ship for 1900, especially when the Italians or Turks build a bunch of 15000 Ton Bs with 6" of armor.
>>1115706War with the Turks soon brothers!
>Washington Treaty lets me build thisGuess we're a real nation now
>>1116887Yeah, there's a bunch of different nations people have built on the forums. Greece was built for 1, but it works for 2 as both playable/enemy with a bit of work. I've been adding regions from the 7seas mod to the normal map, it's working pretty good sofar
>>1116934Got a link to the mods?
>>1116936https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/3317/mod-listHere's the forum link to the RtW2 mods, I don't remember if it requires a login. https://nws-online.proboards.com/attachment/download/6015Is a Japan mod with Italy replaced by ROC, you'll need the ROC mod:https://nws-online.proboards.com/attachment/download/6124Then the Regia Marina mod has Italy facing off with Spain and the Ottomans instead of Germany and Japan, I believe.https://nws-online.proboards.com/attachment/download/7633These are some of the easy ones, but it's not hard to browse through the data files and figure out how it works. I just copy pasted Greece into the Italy warinfo20 file over the German bits
hon hon hon
>>1117053HON HON HON HON HON
>3rd game, starting to get the Basics>playing as Italy>A decade pass, end up stealing/researching some decent guns and turrets>Time to make some new battleships>decide to make them fast becuase the original battleships were slow as fuck>war breaks out with Austria>First few battles dab on them with my speed and big guns>Get a battle in poor weather>Austrian shitboats manage to get close before being spotted and sink 2 of my new Battleships nearly instantlyhow do I improve my vision in bad weather anons?
>>1117801use screens, lots of them. order your big ships to turn away immediately once contact is made and let the dds do the heavy lifting. you did have training in torpedo warfare right, anon?
>>1117801avoid combat with poor visibility, sometimes it just happens anywaysin conditions of poor visibility you should be incredibly defensive with your capital ships and incredibly aggressive with your destroyers, you can murderfuck them with torpedoes just as well as they can youpersonally I always keep at least a pair of torpedo tubes on my battleships to visualize torpedo range if nothing else (they're occasionally actually useful, especially very early and later with long range torpedoes and deck launchers)
I got quality 0 14" guns before three centerline turrets, so I made this thing
>>1117956I'm using ghetto all-or-nothing armor (narrow belt, with belt extended of the same thickness) and have a lot of ammo for protracted stern / bow chases. Heavy secondary and tertiary batteries are for cruiser bullying. Torpedoes are pretty much just there to show the range circle.
>>1117956Why are you using 8" secondaries? Are you using this as a predreadnought killer?
>>1117959why are you having such thick belt extended? i thought they only protect the stern and the bow where there are nothing important worth protecting anyway.
>>1118042He probably misunderstood the concept of a narrow belt as length rather than height.
>10000ton, 8" gun treaty within the first year>Constantly extended for >20 years because why notThere's basically only one ship type left>>1117053>The Kaiser has been deposed.>A communist regime has taken overWat ze fug? I've never seen that, gamefiles should have german revolutions go kaiser -> liberal democracy -> fascist>>1118040Even as a predreadnought killer I wouldn't advise 8" secondaries. He's got better speed and range with the main guns.Besides all secondary/tertiary guns <7" can't flash fire, 8" with 2" splinter protection will be "fun".>>1118042>>1118046>I'm using ghetto all-or-nothing armor (narrow belt, with belt extended of the same thickness) It somewhat works, although AoN has a flat flotation bonus. 10"Belt with 4" BE weighs as much as a 10" narrow Belt with 10" BE.The thing is narrow belt converts some belt hits to BE but also some BE hits to no armor hits. I think BE is also used for intake protection making speed loss less likely which is valuable for battlecruisers.
>>1118046>>1118042I don't have the explainer image handy but it's both length and height. Essentially "flat thickness, narrow belt" covers ~80% of the ship's length and all of the machinery.
>>1118145>>1118040Ostensibly the purpose is to hunt enemy CAs (Germany laid down 10 CAs around when I laid down the Libertes) as well as bullying predreadnoughts and generally supporting the battle line. But the honest answer is I just really, really like Lord Nelson style predreadnoughts. My last generation B is basically the same ship but 19 knots. It's just a really satisfying layout for me, even if it's not optimal.
America showed up to my fleet battle with Germany off Dogger Bank. Technically these are dreadnoughts, but they're 17 knots and only carry 6x12 AXY. Devastation and Magenta have 4x14 and 12x8 secondaries, and are better armored. All my ships are 19 knots. The Liberte class are all here in a scouting group to the north with some DDs. Germany should have ~4 BCs and ~10 CAs and not much else.
>>1118755These are the CAs the Libertes were designed to destroy, but it's going to be dark soon and I won't risk a night engagement.