|
So how do I claim a neutral territory? I just started my first game as Germany, and decided to put three CAs and 4 DDs in Southeast Asia to claim those three nice neutral provinces, but it occurs to me that I have no idea how to do so.
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 09:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
Megadyptes posted:There's some random events that occasionally fire where you can take over neutral places. Ah, thanks. Also, for some reason the event windows are small and cut off most of the text. It's rather frustrating. Any idea what's up with that?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
Yeah, the multiple choice events work fine, but stuff like that second pic have the bottom cut off with the Okay button smushed up high and superimposed over the little text there is.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
Riso posted:The game is not high dpi/large fonts aware. It's why I play it in a virtual machine. Well shoot. Could you share how I can go about making it work on a virtual machine then? It'd be nice to actually know what's going on 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Riso posted:Step 1 I've got Win7 home premium. So I'll need virtual box?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
Riso posted:It doesn't have to be xp, any licensed windows copy will do for the game as long as you don't change the dpi settings. I don't have a copy of any other Windows, and I'm a bit leery of spending more money just to get the game to not have bugged window sizes. I don't know how I'd change DPI settings even if I wanted though, so at least if I do end up going through with it I probably don't have to worry about accidentally changing them  In other news, how good/terrible is this for a torpedo cruiser? I just got the tech to let me put surface torps on CLs before bed last night... actually... before bed this morning actually, god drat this game's addictive... and this is what I came up with. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Hmm, alright. Thanks for the feedback.I'd have gone with just 4 centerline 3-tube mounts, but only DDs can use those slots apparently. So far most other CLs I've gotten intel on have had comparable armor, so that's what I've been going off of. I'll try out less torps, more armor.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Those other CLs are probably more traditional designs, meant to be fleet scouts/pickets and commerce patrol/raiders. Most CLs run from active battle lines, not scream straight at them to fire salvos of torpedoes (unless ordered to do so in a bid to save more valuable ships by forcing the enemy capitals to redirect fire/evade). Ahhh, yeah that makes sense. So, ditch a launcher or two from each side, get more armor so increase the chance of surviving long enough to get in range. Sounds good. I'm fortunate in that I have range 4800 at 38 knots as short for my torps, and over 10,000 range ~30 knots for long so at least they don't have to get quite as close as they used to.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
Annoyingly, trying to up the armor keeps getting it reclassified as a CA. It would be really, really nice if there was a page in the manual that said exactly what the parameters for the classes are.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Problem is the parameters change over time! Well then as of now there's nothing I can do, since I cannot get more than 2" of belt armor. And honestly, my Destroyers with no armor at all are regularly making passes at enemy ships inside 3000 yards and taking only light/medium damage with few actual sinkings, so I'm fine with 2" belt.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Good news everyone! CAs can eventually use above water torpedoes! KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I'd scale down to six inch guns too. Better as an uparmored CL, I think. Plus, if you're going to go all out, all guns up front. uPen posted:It's reclassifying it because now you've got a heavily gunned and armored 8000 ton ship, it's an armored cruiser and the game is telling you so. Drop 3-5k tons and you might be getting somewhere. Yeah, I figured that out while designing this thing. Wanted to give it a single bigass 15 inch gun but it kept being called a B. Downscale the guns a bit, and I get something fast with torps and enough gun to lay down fire on the way in. It's probably horribly, horribly inefficient!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Michaellaneous posted:That's also not a Königsberg It's me. I am the betrayer of the Fatherland. Me.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2015 12:41
|
|
|
So for anyone out there who's in the early game and frustrated by the (in)effectiveness of torpedoes... I just had this happen, and wanted to share. Torpedoes get better. torpedoes get so much better. I lost a dozen destroyers, true. But that's not because they were bad. It's because I ran them into the enemy line and the torpedoes started flying. This was my first battle with GB, end-game war. So, so many BBs and BCs torpedoed and crippled to be pounded by my CAs and BBs. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
Jesus, how'd they get the tech to make a 16000 ton CA go 35 knots in 1915? I think they must have hacked the game files or something. In all seriousness, I like it. Those 14 inch guns will maul any CLs it comes across while also dueling with other CAs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:But that is the thing, it doesn't reduce how much the fuel weighs for a given range band. If the reduction gears make the machinery more efficient you'd need less fuel to reach medium/long/extreme, right? Presumably it has some effect on the chances of your ship running out of fuel and interred in port/scuttled if it's out raiding or in hostile waters without a base.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2016 09:08
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, why does it take so long to research increased caliber guns for ships? I mean, at a glance I'd assume you just make a barrel and feeding mechanism that's wider to accommodate a bigger shell, but that doesn't seem like it'd take years. So I'm guessing there's more to it than that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Honestly, Light Cruisers have so little armor to begin with, and in the early game you're describing you have so little tonnage to work with since you don't have weight saving techs, that I can't imagine giving them extended armor without making them unable to mount any reasonable amount of weaponry. Even if you give them a 2" extended belt to protect them from small caliber guns, enemy CLs probably will wreck you with HE anyway, and since you spent tonnage on that extra armor you're unlikely to win that gun duel. That's been my reasoning. Then again I also prefer to build my early CLs with a pair of 8" guns, so take it with a shaker of salt.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:I still have the serial to this game but I must have lost the files when I lost my harddrive. What do Contact the online store via email and explain the situation. the same thing happened to me and they were able to confirm my identity and send me my serial#.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2016 13:33
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Pretend you're the Orks and have no armor + stupid amounts of guns So, nothing but DDs and AMCs?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:If I was gonna do a joke game, I'd use my Tropico nation. Is there any reason you wouldn't do that? It sounds fun!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I want superposed turrets. I'll do you one better. We need supersuperposed turrets.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Roumba posted:Ziggurat gun placement, got it. 4", then 5", then 6", so on and so forth. It's turrets all the way down!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
It looks fine? The deck armor's a tad thin but it'll be a few years before plunging fire really becomes an issue. The belt coverage and extended is good, though it being Narrow's a bit odd. Hopefully the high extended belt armor helps mitigate that. Turrets seem a tad thinly armored purely by comparison, but their armor can be improved during refits. Cramped and short-ranged shouldn't matter as long as you keep it in Europe.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Its Japanese. As long as you keep it in Northeast/Southeast Asia, then.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:It might be a coastal battery, but it could also be an orphanage. How can you possibly damage the turreted coastal emplacements then? Do you have to rely on plunging fire from really heavy guns in the late game or something? Cause I can't think of anything except maybe +1 18" guns that could penetrate a 32" belt. Man though, not having to sail really lets you up-armor things What if... guys! What if we stopped building ships, and instead made islands float? Think of the tonnage we'd have for gun batteries and armor!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:You would unleash Grey Hunter's ancient nemesis? The TBF? MADNESS! I just want Mortal Engines, but with islands floating across the seas instead of traction cities roaming the land, is that so wrong?! Also, are you going by total cost for them or monthly cost? Since I know coastal batteries take a much shorter amount of time to build than a dread, or even an CA. I will say that while they are definitely heavily fortified (which makes a lot of sense), I've had a lot of trouble using them. There's no way to try and get the enemy into an engagement near them on the strategic side (IE, making battles take place near certain parts of the globe), and once you get into a tactical battle, convincing the enemy to get close to my coastal guns was VERY difficult. I'd say the biggest thing I'd want to see in a mod/RtW2 would be a decreased cost. I don't know if that would be historically inaccurate, to so drastically reduce it, but just being able to make the Atlantic Wall feasible would go a long way towards convincing me to build them. I mean, maybe not full Atlantic Wall, but a drop in price enough to let me build a sizable number of them so as to increase the likelihood that I am able to draw the enemy into range, without letting them give chase to my battle line for hours unopposed. Even if the balance to this change would be making coastal batteries less armored, being able to have them appear without being such a draw on your resources would be nice. Obviously if you're playing certain countries, coastal batteries are more useful; if your whole global presence is only in 1-2 areas like AH or Italy or (mostly) Russia or Japan, then naturally you'll have less places you need to worry about forting up compared to say, the USA, Britain, France, etc. Shoeless fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Oct 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Actually I'd say Austria-Hungary is actually one of the nations that benefits greatly from investment in Coastal fortification (MTB Squadrons too). A lot of its war scenarios are right off the Adriatic coast. That's what I meant, AH is one of the nations that benefits most from Coastal Batteries due to their lack of colonies and small area where battles are likely to occur. Compared to the US or GB where you've got holding sprawled across the world. Obviously those nations would find it far more difficult to successfully fortify everything than Italy or AH.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I think the best solution to the BC arms race is to scrap all your CAs and build 29 and 30 knot CLs. Battlecruisers: Not Even One. Wouldn't that very quickly start to hurt you as enemy Battlecruisers easily outgun and outarmor your CLs, as well as being able to keep up comparable speed?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
I love how that ship looks. The rounded turrets, how they've got the centerline turret nice and comfy between the two upper portions of the ship with a little bridge above it. It's just... charming, incredibly charming. Possible odd question: I know I can have double turrets on CLs at the beginning of the game. However, in my past 2 playthroughts I've hit a point around midgame where I got to design a CL and put a double turret on it to be told in no uncertain terms that I haven't got the research to enable double turrets on CLs. I have no idea what prompts this, and it's a tad frustrating.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
That might be it. I didn't manually switch to slope deck armor scheme but it may well automatically use it once that's been researched. That seems really odd though, to be honest. Any idea why the restriction on mounting more sophisticated turrets simply from switching to a more sophisticated armor layout?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2016 08:11
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The thing is that the game generate battles based on ship classes so there are certain ahistorial things that are optimal. for example BCs get treated as both battleships and cruisers so one BC in a zone will inevitably hunt down and murder all the cruisers so there's very little point in building modern CA's - they'll inevitably be RNG'd into a solo battle with something just as fast and much bigger. Yes, but what I don't understand is why there's an actual tech limitation on sloped armor CLs using double turrets until I get the research for them. I understand that in real life, they used smaller single turret guns (get more armor, then drop your armament at the same time, what?), but I don't understand what the actual physical limitation is that prevents armored CLs from mounting double turrets initially. Or is there none and it's just the game preventing you from doing it to enforce historical accuracy? OpenlyEvilJello posted:That is not a very accurate depiction of Dreadnought, really old American newspaper. For shame. Come now, the news media would never lie to us! W-would they?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Dunno if it's relevant but in my most recent varied tech game as Germany, I got the message to the effect of "Our scientists predict that torpedoes will not be as effective as previously thought." Might be what #2 is. Not that that stopped me from putting quad tubes on every destroyer and, later, CL I possibly could, and even a couple on my BCs. If they're not as destructive, I'll make up for that with more of them! It's pretty incredible watching half the window erupt into bouquets of torpedoes when you order a flotilla attack...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Shoeless, would you mind looking at the save file? You can choose either RTWGameX.bcs (where 'X' is the slot number) or Autosave.bcs. About 30 lines down should be a field labeled "TechQuirk=Y" where 'Y' is an integer. Alternatively, if you want to preserve the mystery, I would appreciate it if you would upload one of those two files somewhere so I can look at it. You got it. Yep, TechQuirk=2. I can upload the autosave still if you like.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Nah, you're good. Thanks for checking, now I can update my notes. No problem, glad I could help.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Anyone know what historical ship this AI template might be based on? Given that it lacks any armor other than the main belt, I'd say it's based on being poo poo? Like, goddamn.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Oh. That would make it way, way less terrible, yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Astroclassicist posted:Just had the bloodiest battle I've fought in this game. 1920, I'm the UK, vs the US. 9 BBs 2BCs on my side, 7BBs, 8 (!) BCs on theirs. They were using 15 inch guns across the fleet, 5 of my BBs were fresh off the slipway with 17 inch. Flash fire?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Fray posted:Speaking of flash fires, does it happen with secondary turrets? Lately I've been experimenting with predreads that have monster secondary batteries. Sometimes I put them in double turrets if I have that tech, and I'm wondering if I'm just making time bombs what with all these turrets everywhere. As long as your armor them as though they were primary batteries you should be okay.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:But I guess thats part of the territory when it comes to grog games. I would counter by saying that certain issues and bad game design being so endemic to a particular genre that it becomes expected by those who frequently play them is not a thing that should be used in defense of a game having those issues, and in fact is actually a big point against it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:No, its very true, I wasn't using "Thats grog games" as a defense, more "yeah that happens a lot". Ah, gotcha.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 23:26
|
|