OT - New Naval Game "Rule the Waves"

[IdahoNYer]

Anybody ever hear of (or play) "Rule the Waves"? this sounds really interesting! I've played "Steam and Iron" and it was pretty good - just a bit limiting in scope.

You can check out a review here:
http://www.wargamer.com/Article/10256

[Jorge_Stanbury]

My PBEM opponent bought it recently and he recommends it.

this as long as you can accept the non existing graphics and you like the 1900 to 1920s gunboat diplomacy era

[dr.hal]

I was a huge fan of Jutland too (still have it in fact) and would love to see a really good detailed replacement computer game. Hal

[Rising-Sun]

Look interesting, hope this isn't like World in Flames. Need something in simulation that showing the real things.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

The more I read about it, the better it looks:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/07 ... ore-302131

[IdahoNYer]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury


The more I read about it, the better it looks:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/07 ... ore-302131

Great link Jorge - thanks. It does look quite interesting. Price isn't terrible either..

[Jorge_Stanbury]

OK I bought it...

Game is just OK, that is it. The game has 3 components:

- Geopolitical:
This is a dumbed down version of a Paradox game; you control the navy department of one power, each turn you will get events that can increase tension against one of your 6 potential enemies. Avoiding tension means loss of prestige and budget, so eventually tension will increase and force you into into war against "one" enemy.. This is important to mention. Only one enemy; the game is binary, there are no coalitions, there are no wars between other powers. Geopolitics in the game are very basic. There is no attempt to try to model the imperialistic "great game" scenario that happened in the 1900s.. events are generic and sometime ludicrous: In my last game as USA, Ireland rebelled against UK, then some turns afterwards, Russia decided to intervene there to quell some unrest and because I (USA) decided not to intervene, Russia ended occupying Ireland.. while UK did nothing. In this game the UK was there only as a potential foe for the human player.. so no long term goals, other than build a kick ass navy and be ready to fight me.

- Tactical:
As soon as the war starts, you will start getting random chances of fleet engagements. These are random and the AI won't follow Mahanian principles. Playing as Japan you might see half of Czarist fleet in South East Asia. while the other half is in Africa (again, AI won't care about a potential war vs Germany because it won't happen). The game interface is very basic. Graphics of course are from a 1990s accounting software at most.. but works fine. I haven't played extensively, but I will say that it models naval warfare realism quite well damage, probably at the level of WiTP-AE. My only complaint here is interface is not very user friendly and there will be too many unnecessary clicks.

- Ship design:
This last part of the game is what shines. It is quite fun to design ships moving from the armored cruiser era to the mid 1920s "almost WW2" BBs. In the few days I had been playing this game, I have learn a lot on the why of some of these weird designs we see in WiTP-AE.

- Verdict:
I am happy I bought this $35 game. It is certainly not WITP-AE, but it will keep me busy for maybe a week

[IdahoNYer]

Thanks Jorge- good summary. Was hoping better in the "Geopolitical" portion of the game - so it doesn't, or not provision to, follow the basic historical line, such as events leading up to the Russo-Japanese War or WWI either? Its all just pretty much random?

I enjoyed Steam and Iron for the rudimentary campaign in the North Sea - but that was limiting. The tactical portion was fairly good, and looks the same here. Also looking forward to the ship design aspect. Was hoping the geopolitical portion would follow a basic historical line with your decisions as "navy minister" having potential impacts on the outcome.


Still may wind up getting it at some point - maybe they'll do some patching to work out some kinks.

Glad you've found something to keep you busy between WiTP turns!!! (which is what I'm looking for, although L_S_T usually maintains a pretty good pace compared to me!)

[sven6345789]

I can really recommend the game if you are interested in the dreadnought race and naval technical development between 1900-1925.

[IdahoNYer]

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

I can really recommend the game if you are interested in the dreadnought race and naval technical development between 1900-1925.

Still on the fence, but it does look interesting!

[Numdydar]

A friend of mine (who loves navy games) and plays AE bought it and is having a lot of fun with it.

You can have alliances in the game. But these have no historical basis. In his game the UK declared war on the US [X(]. So in the 'world' view of the game, the powers are more like the ones in Risk versus being historical. However they do have historical restrictions that are established at the start of the game. Japan being limited to what size ships it can build as an example at the start.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Alliances are random events (you can't request one). If the event comes and you choose to seek alliance, then it will depend on tension level and die roll.
Once your alliance is at war, then you will receive victory points for the Allies' naval actions... and that is it, you won't see or control anything else, no joint strategy or combined fleets.

With regards to historical restrictions, yes, but they are relative... Japan can order ships from any power, even as the starting fleet. There is a risk of the order being cancelled, but in one game France delivered even thought we were at "orange" high tension.

Risk is a good analogy for this game's gepolitics.. I wish next time they port their tactical/ ship design game into at least something like Master of Orion

[Jaroen]

Just another recommendation for trying out this game!.

Have to add, there's more to diplomacy and fleet distribution under the hood than shown via the player interface. Players should realize this game is not supposed to repeat real events and doesn't trigger specific WW1 objectives. It simulates tension present between states basically similar to historic lines but certainly not exact. States hold interests and when these conflict, like British obtaining possessions in USA 'territory', you can raise tension until it blows. Thus you may have wars between otherwise friendly states.

And, that's the object of the game. To simulate fleet battles between WW1 era big gun fleets of your own design. Create your own 'improvements' and see how they work out against a variety of opponents. A total 'what if'. The actual battles are quite detailed with damage simulated much more detailed than WitP:AE. You wll have damaged boiler rooms, damaged guns, damaged hulls, fires, etc. And, you decided for yourself how much armour your ships needed. Or what guns to use for dishing out the hits.

Its fun and plays quick and simple. True enough, its not a very slick interface but it works.

[Templer_12]

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer

Anybody ever hear of (or play) "Rule the Waves"? this sounds really interesting! I've played "Steam and Iron" and it was pretty good - just a bit limiting in scope.

You can check out a review here:
http://www.wargamer.com/Article/10256

One more thread here: ->
Fredrik Wallin's Rule the Waves - A Game of Naval Ship Design and Naval Combat

[tocaff]

I got it a while ago and it's interesting, fun and frustrating all rolled into 1. It's a good time killer while awaiting that next AE turn to arrive in the email.

[Xenocide]

I bought it when it first came out.

The first patch really helped a lot. Here is what I think.

Geopolitical: The game does not model historical alliances or enmity. Anyone can go to war with anyone and no wars are fought that do not involve the player. I have heard rumors of this possibly changing in future patches. You also do not control your geopolitical destiny. You basically play the Admiralty board and can make recommendations and react to political leadership and your advice is sought but you cannot declare war (though you may be asked if you are ready and then the Prime Minister will). You also have to keep your colonies garrisoned with certain tonnages to avoid prestige losses and lower the chances of rebellion.

Ship Design and Building: Works pretty well. The classes are restricted to prevent the player from building a Battleship and calling it an armored cruiser but outside of that you can build anything your shipyard can handle (game caps at 52,000 tonnes but you will start at around 14-16k depending on nation). You have to research tech to develop improved ships and can decide how much of the budget to put in research (standard practice is to put it at the maximum 10%) and can prioritize where you want to focus. If you want to focus on fire control and deemphasize sub development you can.

Sometimes politicians will want specific ships built (more destroyers or cruisers or subs) and sometimes the people will give you a bunch of money to build a battleship or battlecruiser. You have to manage your budget and sometimes halt ship construction to keep your budget humming along. Your budget is mostly influenced by tension with other nations. When tensions are low your budget is low. When it is high you get more money. When you are at war you get more. Of course at the speed you can build battleships often wartime building is for the next war.

Wars: Once a war starts you start playing with the toys you built. The combat is slow and annoying in the early game when hits are incredibly rare. In the late game it becomes more of a tense and exciting affair when shots hit a lot more and battles tend to be more decisive. Battles are auto-generated but you usually have the option to refuse the type of engagement by giving your opponent VP. A few battles (most notably raider intercepts) are mandatory. If you dominate an area with an enemy colony you sometimes can invade it and possibly take it. If you dominate their home area you get VP every turn for blockading them.

Battles are fought at 1 minute intervals. You can set the game to keep running until something happens or have it go in 1 or 5 minute turns when things start getting interesting. The game pauses to let you issue orders. The most common mode is rear admiral mode where you control your flagship and any capital ship group in close proximity. You cannot control destroyers unless that is all you have but you can assign who they are covering and give the order to try for torpedoes. This usually does not work early but torpedoes get scarier as time goes on.

VP totals are a rough determining factor as to who is winning the war. Usually both sides score VP in every battle for damaging and sinking ships but whoever does better gets more. When you have a VP advantage the enemy is more likely to offer concessions to end the war. There is also the unrest factor. As it rises things fall apart and if it falls all the way the government collapses. This is the best victory you can win against an enemy and the worst thing that can happen to you. It is possible to have your people revolt even though you are winning on VPs. Sometimes you may have to divert naval funding to social programs to keep things together. When you win a war and are ahead on VPs you usually get to claim a few opposing colonies and possibly a ship or two as war reparations.

Overall: I enjoy the game. It is fun to be the United States, defeat Britain, and claim Ireland as part of the peace deal. I am only mediocre at ship construction but I have built a few winners and a few boondoggles. Ask me about my pair of 40,000 ton battlecruisers with inadequate top turret armor that both blew up within 5 minutes of each other in a long range gun duel. The AI nations tend to follow general tendencies of their nation to focus on armor, firepower, speed, balanced builds, etc. The game can also be frustrating when you watch those beautiful ships you spent so much money on dying and knowing how long they will take to replace and loving the tech upgrades but realizing the battleship you laid down last year is already obsolete before it is finished.

[Admiral DadMan]

Xenocide, thanks for a thoughtful post.

This game looks like a winner for those whose interest is 1900-1925. I was on the verge of buying it, until I started reading that playing past 1925 can start generating errors. Although it is advertised to run to 1950, the code was written to end in 1925.

What is your experience with that?

[Jorge_Stanbury]

In one game I continued playing for a few more years (I was at war by Dec 25, and I wanted to finish it).

You might play until 1950, but the "tech trees" end in 1925... so you will basically see all powers leveling up up to the best technology avaiable in the 20s..