Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Finished my first game with AH! Ended in '55 with 66 prestige. Beat France in my final war, sunk 4 of their BBs (and more BCs) with my BB squadron and there was crazy air combat during the battle for the Mediterranean! In the final years, it was like both sides losing 5+ subs every month during wars.

[Karlito]

Thanks for being so helpful peeps.
1.) Is rebuilding ever worth it? In a test game I rebuilt my initial pre-dreadnought battleships into CAs, but their maintenance shot up and while theyre big guns were good at going toe to toe with the Italians they were otherwise fairly poor and often got outmaneuvered or stranded in larger operations. Likewise it seems infinitely cheaper to just build new ships.

The main reason real-life navies did major rebuilds it that they were under treaty restrictions and couldn't build new ships, so I think that's the big use-case. Capital ships built during the 1920s can stay useful for quite a few decades after if you keep their fire-controls and AA armaments up-to-date, but I'd say it's almost never worthwhile to rebuild your pre-dreads into anything, and machinery replacement is so expensive that you should consider hard the trade-offs you'd be making.

[Dostoevsky]

Congrats, sounds like a great game.

Of course, if you had lost more, your prestige would probably be double.  In a losing war, there is an event that fires regularly that asks if you want to continue the war.   By insisting on continuing the war, you get one prestige.  It fires several times a year.

Thanks. Honestly, I think I'm happier playing the game without doing the sort of jerk-y things that are sometimes linked with prestige. E.g. blocking social reforms, saying no to any alliance ever, etc. That's one of the things I like so much about RtW compared to 'grand strategy' games - not really about map painting or 'winning', just not getting fired and handling the job decently enough.

That said, I definitely missed a few good opportunities to improve my prestige. Not a perfect run by any means, but a fun one. Supported (and got passage of) a universal submarine ban in the 40s, which definitely changed the arc of things late in the campaign... and made the final war interesting, as I never bothered to rebuild my sub fleet but Russia did.

[LoSboccacc]

uff, I like the game and all but why not let me be wild

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

beside that's just a monitor, not something extreme

[EuchreJack]

I believe you can just ignore the warning and save the ship.  I had the same question, and that was the answer that I got.  I think it works.

Pretty wild ship though.  12" gun, speed 22, little armor, relatively small.  Wouldn't the ship just tip over in bad weather?

[LoSboccacc]

yeah it was just to see how it'd worked, I wanted to get some fat gun fasts and wanted to see if I could go this way

in the end I just did a cl feint and a dd torpedo rush to clean up the british bb and that was it. early years are mad especially if varied tech hit guns.

[Nelia Hawk]

this looks interesting (after playing the demo) more naval focused hearts of iron or so, but.. gosh their priceing reminds me of distant worlds haha

[LoSboccacc]

it's quite repetitive and the lack of an operations layer annoying at best but often just infuriating

[EuchreJack]

It's not Hearts of Iron (unless the recent naval expansion changed things completely).

Most of the game is abstracted into random events.  And the ship builder is far more detailed than anything coming out of Paradox studios.

Here is why I bought it: As a young boy, I was fascinated by battleships.  I tried to design my own with grid paper, but never got anywhere.  This game lets me live out that childhood fantasy.  I can make battleships, and occasionally see them in action.  That is the game.

Frankly, everything outside of ship design is just about giving you the excuse to use your ships, and maybe giving you ideas for designing new ships.

[EuchreJack]

Please forgive the double post, but apparently at the same time I was posting above, the developer implemented Missiles!

...less promising is this:
"We really want to create a more complex rendering of all the missile types, which will take much more time and effort than it did for the basic missiles in 1.19.
In light of that fact, and the fact that 1.19 was taking longer than expected to complete, we decided to save work on those for later - possibly even as part of an expansion or DLC."

Yeah, when the game costs $35, discussion of pushing advanced missiles as an extra charge seems excessive, probably not a cost I'd consider.  They would be better off releasing the updated missiles as a free update later this year or early next year, to get a few more people to buy the base game.  People don't like to buy a game these days if they feel the developer has abandoned it (and whatever bugs haven't been fixed), so there is real profit to just updating the base game.

[Knave]

Please forgive the double post, but apparently at the same time I was posting above, the developer implemented Missiles!

...less promising is this:
"We really want to create a more complex rendering of all the missile types, which will take much more time and effort than it did for the basic missiles in 1.19.
In light of that fact, and the fact that 1.19 was taking longer than expected to complete, we decided to save work on those for later - possibly even as part of an expansion or DLC."

Yeah, when the game costs $35, discussion of pushing advanced missiles as an extra charge seems excessive, probably not a cost I'd consider.  They would be better off releasing the updated missiles as a free update later this year or early next year, to get a few more people to buy the base game.  People don't like to buy a game these days if they feel the developer has abandoned it (and whatever bugs haven't been fixed), so there is real profit to just updating the base game.

Oof yeah. I mean I guess it depends on what else they were including in the expansion, but weren't missiles promised originally in this game and then continually pushed off?

Maybe work on an expansion, and include the missile as a free update when it launches a la pardox. I dunno :/

[EuchreJack]

Yeah, I think you're right about that.

They could at least say: "Hey folks, how about we expand the timeline through the cold war.  Also, working missiles!"

[Glloyd]

That's a yikes from me. I doubt I'd ever buy it regardless of the price though, I don't think I've ever played past the late 40s. The early game is infinitely more interesting than the late game to me.

[Knave]

That's a yikes from me. I doubt I'd ever buy it regardless of the price though, I don't think I've ever played past the late 40s. The early game is infinitely more interesting than the late game to me.

But what if they expanded the timeline in the opposite direction? Steam powered boats in the 1850s! 

[Glloyd]

I could get behind that, it could be pretty cool. But I think they've said they have no interest in that. Which is a shame, because even moving the game's start date a decade earlier would be interesting. The early game battles and ship design is the best part, because you're trying all sorts of dumb shit to gain the slightest advantage over your opponent, and it's made all the more interesting by the limitations you have to work within. By later game, those limitations aren't really there, and all your designs end up being kind of samey. It doesn't help that carrier combat is the least interesting part of the strategic game.