I guess I'm having trouble understanding the point of this game. I thought I was getting a grand tactical strategy game - something like War in the Pacif - AE with just the ships. Instead, a lot of resources seem to have been devoted to tactical naval combat.
I'm not interested in chasing enemy ships in circles and playing an arcade game. Also, I find it difficult to comprehend what is going on in combat since the messages disappear very quickly. I like the way WiP-AE does it and the ships are depicted on either side and I watch ships fire back and forth with visual damage effects.
Other thoughts:
- What is the point of the smoke coming from the ships? Is that supposed to tell me the wind direction?
- Why doesn't the map depict how many ships are in each region? What part of the region are the ships in? Some of the regions are very large.
- Does anyone seriously believe major powers are going to declare war on each other if I send a cruiser vs. a corvette to a 3rd world country in some dust up or if I insult their visiting naval attache? Why not just give me the power to outright declare war since I know what choice to make if I want war with another power.
- Why does the game end in the 1970's and not to present?
- The game does not tell me where my drydocks are? Just the overall dock size I have? For example, what if I wanted to bomb an enemy ship under repair or construction?
Game Thoughts
Re: Game Thoughts
I suppose the point is to mange the evolution of your naval forces in line with technology, economics and your strategy.
Consider 'chasing ships around in circles' to be less of an arcade game, more of discovering whether your designs are any good or not vs. what the AI comes up with.
Granted the UI is (very) basic, but that isn't where the focus is.
The smoke is just for atmosphere I think.
You can see what ships are in a particular area by left clicking on it and you'll get a list. Which you can then move all or part of somewhere else.
If you study the history of the early years the game covers, you'll see that the major powers could indeed provoke each other to the point of war with gunboats. Search 'agadir crisis' for instance. And gunboat diplomacy is still a thing. Think US 7th fleet and Taiwan.
AFAICT, RTW finishes in the 70s because Harpoon picks it up from there
The designers have made a very deliberate design decision not to include strategic bombing of ships under construction or repair, to improve playability most likely. Otherwise Germany at least would be useless after 1940 or so. If you wanted to model air defence and air superiority as well, RTW would be turned into an air game instead of a naval game. Instead, air power is certainly effective but limited by the game's constraints.
RTW is not a historical simulation. It is primarily an exploration of naval technology with reference to plausible technical factors, but in an alternative universe where Powers settle their issues primarily by sea warfare instead of land or air.
Consider 'chasing ships around in circles' to be less of an arcade game, more of discovering whether your designs are any good or not vs. what the AI comes up with.
Granted the UI is (very) basic, but that isn't where the focus is.
The smoke is just for atmosphere I think.
You can see what ships are in a particular area by left clicking on it and you'll get a list. Which you can then move all or part of somewhere else.
If you study the history of the early years the game covers, you'll see that the major powers could indeed provoke each other to the point of war with gunboats. Search 'agadir crisis' for instance. And gunboat diplomacy is still a thing. Think US 7th fleet and Taiwan.
AFAICT, RTW finishes in the 70s because Harpoon picks it up from there
The designers have made a very deliberate design decision not to include strategic bombing of ships under construction or repair, to improve playability most likely. Otherwise Germany at least would be useless after 1940 or so. If you wanted to model air defence and air superiority as well, RTW would be turned into an air game instead of a naval game. Instead, air power is certainly effective but limited by the game's constraints.
RTW is not a historical simulation. It is primarily an exploration of naval technology with reference to plausible technical factors, but in an alternative universe where Powers settle their issues primarily by sea warfare instead of land or air.
Re: Game Thoughts
The engine started entirely as a tactical naval combat game, 'Steam and Iron'. A series of historical scenarios with pre-determined forces that the players took control of in order to refight.hossjww30 wrote: Tue Oct 14, 2025 6:54 pm I guess I'm having trouble understanding the point of this game. I thought I was getting a grand tactical strategy game - something like War in the Pacif - AE with just the ships. Instead, a lot of resources seem to have been devoted to tactical naval combat.
The ship builder got bolted on to the tactical engine along with the map to create RtW. Further work resulted in Aircraft and various Carriers and lead to RtW2. Even more work saw the addition of missiles and extension of the game timeline on both sides to create RtW3.
As for the battles themselves, it has been suggested several times that an auto-resolve feature be added. So far, it hasn't materialised and I suspect that is due to how simplistic the current one appears to be (allied combats in war tend to be oddly unbalanced with respect to losses).
Re: Game Thoughts
Not sure I like the idea of an auto-resolve. For me at least, the attraction of the game is designing the ships within the current available tech and budget, and then seeing how they go against the computer opponents--after engineering a war against them, or alternatively, being stuck with a war you didn't actually want.
Personally I much prefer big gun actions to aircraft, and aircraft to missiles, at which point things get rather tedious with furious but short missile exchanges after which everyone is either sunk or runs away in a few minutes.
Another good reason not to extend past 1970. There hasn't been a real naval battle since 1945 except for the Falklands, and this didn't demonstrate much of interest except that aluminium burns rather nicely, and very poor nations can't prevail against richer ones, which we kind of knew anyway. What it is all about now is the tech gap, and if you've even slightly off the pace these days, you're toast. This was less the case the farther back you go, but has been more and more evident since 1945.
The other point of note is that RTW devs have completely avoided nukes of any type, which of course changed everything.
Personally I much prefer big gun actions to aircraft, and aircraft to missiles, at which point things get rather tedious with furious but short missile exchanges after which everyone is either sunk or runs away in a few minutes.
Another good reason not to extend past 1970. There hasn't been a real naval battle since 1945 except for the Falklands, and this didn't demonstrate much of interest except that aluminium burns rather nicely, and very poor nations can't prevail against richer ones, which we kind of knew anyway. What it is all about now is the tech gap, and if you've even slightly off the pace these days, you're toast. This was less the case the farther back you go, but has been more and more evident since 1945.
The other point of note is that RTW devs have completely avoided nukes of any type, which of course changed everything.
Re: Game Thoughts
RTW3 is meant to be a strategic naval management game with a tactical combat component. As other users have mentioned, the focus is on large-scale decisions for your nation's navy. Think of yourself as the chief minister or head of the admiralty, and you make decisions on procurement, force positioning, and technology priorities. While you may not control an entire nation - you're not the king or president after all, you can influence policy, by investing in intelligence and responding to events that may affect the naval budget or relations with other nations. However, you're not the one who pulls the trigger - that's the job of your nation's political body.
The tactical component of the game is to put your strategy to the test to see if you can prosecute wars that you were intending or maybe were pulled into by surprise, because you were allied with a nation that chose to fight a war.
Bottom line, the point of Rule the Waves 3 is to put you in the chair of the naval leadership of your nation, and to do your best over the course of many years and decades.
To respond to some of your questions:
1. The map should depict the number of active ships per region. You can do this in several ways: A) there's a UI setting on the map that shows a bar chart of relative strength within each region to get an at-a-glance view of strength comparison, or B) click on one of the regions and you should get a menu with info describing available ships, possessions, and other useful info.
2. Previous iterations of RTW ended earlier than 1970. Extending the timeline into 1970, the early missile age, was a major advancement compared to the previous game. We have, of course, considered extending the timeline further, but we estimate this would be a significant development effort. This doesn't mean it won't happen - it just means that currently investing in this doesn't fit our current internal priorities, which are to make the upcoming Expanded Battles expansion the best it can be.
3. Regarding the point about targeting specific drydocks - as mentioned above, RTW3 is a high-level strategic game focusing on the navy, with a tactical combat layer. If there's enough interest, we're happy to consider adding more functionality and detail to combat and operational decision-making if it makes for the overall design of the game. Currently, it doesn't fit the scale, scope, and vision for the game.
The tactical component of the game is to put your strategy to the test to see if you can prosecute wars that you were intending or maybe were pulled into by surprise, because you were allied with a nation that chose to fight a war.
Bottom line, the point of Rule the Waves 3 is to put you in the chair of the naval leadership of your nation, and to do your best over the course of many years and decades.
To respond to some of your questions:
1. The map should depict the number of active ships per region. You can do this in several ways: A) there's a UI setting on the map that shows a bar chart of relative strength within each region to get an at-a-glance view of strength comparison, or B) click on one of the regions and you should get a menu with info describing available ships, possessions, and other useful info.
2. Previous iterations of RTW ended earlier than 1970. Extending the timeline into 1970, the early missile age, was a major advancement compared to the previous game. We have, of course, considered extending the timeline further, but we estimate this would be a significant development effort. This doesn't mean it won't happen - it just means that currently investing in this doesn't fit our current internal priorities, which are to make the upcoming Expanded Battles expansion the best it can be.
3. Regarding the point about targeting specific drydocks - as mentioned above, RTW3 is a high-level strategic game focusing on the navy, with a tactical combat layer. If there's enough interest, we're happy to consider adding more functionality and detail to combat and operational decision-making if it makes for the overall design of the game. Currently, it doesn't fit the scale, scope, and vision for the game.
Re: Game Thoughts
In my opinion the games lacks an operational side. The strategy is very much limited to peace time: what ships to build, to increase docks now or wait, or increase base capacity in some areas, or entering an alliance with some country etc
But once we start a war the only main action we can take ourselves is an invasion, if by any chance we can invade an enemy territory: where or for which purpose does not matter. If we can invade a God forgotten place, we will. Because it's the only thing we can do. Otherwise wars are just a series of random battles the AI sets up for us without any particular purpose other than sink more enemy ships that they sink yours. No attacking this or that harbour to trap some enemy ships (like the Germans tried in WWI) or advancing through the Pacific "island hopping" (as the USN did in WWII until they reached Japan). Or to conquer Borneo because there's oil there, or strategic ports like Gibraltar, Malta, or Singapore (and if we get them in a peace treaty, they are not that useful: possessing Gibraltar does not stop enemy ships crossing the strait without any problem), or to attack Midway or Pearl Harbour... Nothing. Nada. Just random battles without any strategic purpose behind.
Maybe adding this depth of strategy is beyond what's possible for the game?
They have invested a lot of time and effort adding first carriers and then missiles. And that's great. But they are still random battles exactly as they were in the original RTW. Continuing the same path, they are making some improvements to the combat system, so we can just play battles, choose the ships etc. But improving the operational side, the strategy at war, seems it's not in the works.
But once we start a war the only main action we can take ourselves is an invasion, if by any chance we can invade an enemy territory: where or for which purpose does not matter. If we can invade a God forgotten place, we will. Because it's the only thing we can do. Otherwise wars are just a series of random battles the AI sets up for us without any particular purpose other than sink more enemy ships that they sink yours. No attacking this or that harbour to trap some enemy ships (like the Germans tried in WWI) or advancing through the Pacific "island hopping" (as the USN did in WWII until they reached Japan). Or to conquer Borneo because there's oil there, or strategic ports like Gibraltar, Malta, or Singapore (and if we get them in a peace treaty, they are not that useful: possessing Gibraltar does not stop enemy ships crossing the strait without any problem), or to attack Midway or Pearl Harbour... Nothing. Nada. Just random battles without any strategic purpose behind.
Maybe adding this depth of strategy is beyond what's possible for the game?
They have invested a lot of time and effort adding first carriers and then missiles. And that's great. But they are still random battles exactly as they were in the original RTW. Continuing the same path, they are making some improvements to the combat system, so we can just play battles, choose the ships etc. But improving the operational side, the strategy at war, seems it's not in the works.
Re: Game Thoughts
Yes the emphasis seems to definitely be on the tactical battles, not necessarily strategic decisions. I just started playing the game so no final verdict yet. It shows promise.
I guess maybe it might have been better to start w/ the WiP-AE engine and just add a ship designer?
I guess maybe it might have been better to start w/ the WiP-AE engine and just add a ship designer?
Re: Game Thoughts
Well, one thing is for sure: I've spent lots of happy hours playing this game. I'm sure the same will happen to you.
Planning the fleet, designing the ships, setting up their deployment etc is much fun. And the way we, the admiral on charge of the navy, get embroiled in that minefield of politics is very well done. It’s not so overwhelming that slows down the pace of the game but enough to make us very annoyed at how our politicians interfering and incompetence affect the navy.
Battles are fun, too. Maybe a few things could (and I’m sure, will) be improved there so I’m fine with it.
That’s why wars may feel a bit unsatisfying in comparison: they are so abstracted, that soon there’s not much else to do other than fighting battle after battle, all set up for us by the AI.
But as I said, as a whole the game is a gem.
Planning the fleet, designing the ships, setting up their deployment etc is much fun. And the way we, the admiral on charge of the navy, get embroiled in that minefield of politics is very well done. It’s not so overwhelming that slows down the pace of the game but enough to make us very annoyed at how our politicians interfering and incompetence affect the navy.
Battles are fun, too. Maybe a few things could (and I’m sure, will) be improved there so I’m fine with it.
That’s why wars may feel a bit unsatisfying in comparison: they are so abstracted, that soon there’s not much else to do other than fighting battle after battle, all set up for us by the AI.
But as I said, as a whole the game is a gem.
Re: Game Thoughts
There are not pre-built ship classes though? For example, if I start as the Germans in 1890, will the Bismarck class become available automatically once I research the appropriate techs?
Re: Game Thoughts
I'm not sure there's a template for the Bismarck-class ships offhand.
But most real-world ships cap be replicated with a bit of effort on the player's part.
But most real-world ships cap be replicated with a bit of effort on the player's part.
-
thedoctorking
- Posts: 3011
- Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:00 am
Re: Game Thoughts
I too would like to see an operational component. This would be a whole new game, more like WinPac AE with a tactical component. Since this game is essentially a labor of love by two or so people if I understand correctly, I don't think they have the resources to do this. But it would sure be cool if they could.
-
martinworsey
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2025 2:47 pm
Re: Game Thoughts
The original Steam and Iron game mentioned above included campaigns (WW1 North Sea and RJW) and this was similar to War in the Pacific but predominantly naval with tactical battles as well as the strategic model. This includes features such as shore bombardment, blockships, commerce raiding and the like.
In my opinion, this is probably the best historical wargame available.
Rule the Waves is more of a ship design game with only loose resemblance to history. The strategic aspect is not especially well covered.
The forthcoming Expanded Battles DLC promises historical battles with historical ships in a more extended timeframe than Steam and Iron. Unfortunately, there is no campaign element announced as yet.
In my opinion, this is probably the best historical wargame available.
Rule the Waves is more of a ship design game with only loose resemblance to history. The strategic aspect is not especially well covered.
The forthcoming Expanded Battles DLC promises historical battles with historical ships in a more extended timeframe than Steam and Iron. Unfortunately, there is no campaign element announced as yet.