+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 33 of 33

Thread: Naval Battles Warscore

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by 1alexey View Post
    A properly build and garisoned fort can hold for month, if not years. that was from ~8k BC, and that was true for WW2.
    Yes, I agree, but as I said, these Sevastopol-like cases are exceptional: capital or strategic port, but not EVERY province. Most provinces should be occupied immediately.

    Also, during real-world wars, there were so many cases when huge army arrives in some city and the city mayor just decides to surrender the city so it wouldn't be destroyed.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by ajax.hsp View Post
    Yes, I agree, but as I said, these Sevastopol-like cases are exceptional: capital or strategic port, but not EVERY province. Most provinces should be occupied immediately.

    Also, during real-world wars, there were so many cases when huge army arrives in some city and the city mayor just decides to surrender the city so it wouldn't be destroyed.
    This is a game. some things have to be simplified.

    Sure but based on what?
    That require a new level of stuff such as provincial warfare, sieges, local garisons,..

    Easier to abstract them all in just one "occupation" slider, where "fort" is a generic province defence, not nececerely a concrete box of certain displacement with certain armament, or a star-fort with X cannons and Y riflemen, and so on. those level of detales is only possible in Total-war style game.

    So the better province is defended thee larger force you need to keep in your rear to suppress and eventually "occupy" province.
    Everything makes sence, although it would surely be niceto have some limiting factors like maintenance.

  3. #23
    yeah, it's a game... It just sometimes so unfair.
    Even if you have bigger army and higher techs and you want only one region you need to occupy almost half of your enemy's country, which is fast if your enemy is Belgium, but not Austria or France.
    Also, in fact, every war just ends as monotonous occupying routine.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by ajax.hsp View Post
    yeah, it's a game... It just sometimes so unfair.
    Even if you have bigger army and higher techs and you want only one region you need to occupy almost half of your enemy's country, which is fast if your enemy is Belgium, but not Austria or France.
    Also, in fact, every war just ends as monotonous occupying routine.
    Well AI is hard-coded to not agree on any peace for some time. Than it will gladly accept peace with enough warscore.

  5. #25
    Colonel the_Hussar's Avatar
    Rome GoldVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by 1alexey View Post
    A properly build and garisoned fort can hold for month, if not years. that was from ~8k BC, and that was true for WW2.
    Read about Fort Eben-Emael in Belgium, or the Maginot Line ... and look at the D-Day beaches (also a "fortress sytem") They held out for less than a day.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by 1alexey View Post
    IMO V2 has a very good system of warscore.
    The victory on land is useless unless you occupy the land, especially the land you want.
    The victory on sea is usless unless you can go blockading the enemy and so forth.
    Apart from morale hit/loss battles themselves didn`t matter that much in Victorian era.

    As for Ruso-Japanese war, Japanese actually won land campaign, a naval victory in itself was merely a supplement, and without any means to retaliate Russians desided to peace-out.
    Lets see... blockaiding and holding the province only raises the score by .01% unless it is the capital. Every game I have played the battles turn the score, same for blockading. I'v done massive damage to nations and have a positive war score only to loose a single battle and have it turn from +8 to -9 because of the one battle.

    Also, the naval battle was EVERYTHING. Everyone considered Japan to be some unknown third world nation that was backward and ignorant. Suddenly a fleet comes out that out maneuvers and completely decimates the Russian fleet, even going as far as to capture and re purpose some of those Russian ships. Their naval build up only sped up from there eventually leading them to be able fight against the USA in WWII. That battle meant EVERYTHING

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by the_Hussar View Post
    Read about Fort Eben-Emael in Belgium, or the Maginot Line ... and look at the D-Day beaches (also a "fortress sytem") They held out for less than a day.
    Exactly, now if we are talking about early game then it could work but as the game goes further along... with poison gas, artillery, tanks no fort is going to hold out to long, especially OLDER forts that were built during the 1800s.

    Doesn't matter how beautiful and effective the french starforts were, a mortar is going right over those walls and down onto their heads.

  8. #28
    Benevolent Imperialist flame7926's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIISemper FiVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedCK2: Holy Knight
    500k club

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    2,218
    It makes sense for land battles to have the most effect. But, there should be some sort of naval prestige. If you beat a country with a lot of it in a naval battle, you get a lot of warscore.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by flame7926 View Post
    It makes sense for land battles to have the most effect. But, there should be some sort of naval prestige. If you beat a country with a lot of it in a naval battle, you get a lot of warscore.
    That depends though. England has always been a naval super power, so has the Netherlands. If you were to completely decimate their navy in direct combat it would do so much more then to demoralize then to win a few land battles.

  10. #30
    Benevolent Imperialist flame7926's Avatar
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDeus VultEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesFor the Motherland
    Hearts of Iron IIISemper FiVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedCK2: Holy Knight
    500k club

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    2,218
    It depends if you beat them in their home country or their colonies, if it was on their mainland it should hurt them more than a naval battle.

  11. #31
    Colonel the_Hussar's Avatar
    Rome GoldVictoria 2

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by smeagolthevile View Post
    ... no fort is going to hold out to long, especially OLDER forts that were built during the 1800s.
    Actually, the Maginot was built between the Wars and finished in the 30s. Fort Eben-Emael was built from 1930-35, and considered the most advanced and impregnable fort in the world. It fell to a handful of German Glider troops when the invasion of the west started in 1940. And everyone knows Festung Europa was built from 1943 to 1944.

  12. #32
    I think we've gotten a bit off the topic of naval warfare here, now it's more about defects in the late game land based campaign, now I don't want to move this further away from it's original topic, but I would like to give some solutions for this off branch discussion if I may:

    1: Increase the base cost in materiel of forts and ports, keeps countries from building them for just a wee bit longer, or a lot longer, depending on what factor you increase the cost by.

    2: Alter late game military techs to increase reconnaissance values of all military units, to symbolize their improved ability to occupy/ circumvent/ annihilate land based defensive systems.

    3: This may be a bit far-fetched, but I've looked at some Vicky 2 modding commands, and apparently you can make a trigger of how many ships have been sunk, I dunno if this is done by a war by war basis, or in total, but either way it wouldn't be difficult to tie this into an event for countries with large navies (another thing the code will recognize) and give a bit of WE or some such penalty based on the number of ships lost.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by the_Hussar View Post
    Read about Fort Eben-Emael in Belgium, or the Maginot Line ... and look at the D-Day beaches (also a "fortress sytem") They held out for less than a day.
    Read about Sevastopol, Brest-Litevks fortress,..
    Quote Originally Posted by smeagolthevile View Post
    Lets see... blockaiding and holding the province only raises the score by .01% unless it is the capital. Every game I have played the battles turn the score, same for blockading. I'v done massive damage to nations and have a positive war score only to loose a single battle and have it turn from +8 to -9 because of the one battle.

    Also, the naval battle was EVERYTHING. Everyone considered Japan to be some unknown third world nation that was backward and ignorant. Suddenly a fleet comes out that out maneuvers and completely decimates the Russian fleet, even going as far as to capture and re purpose some of those Russian ships. Their naval build up only sped up from there eventually leading them to be able fight against the USA in WWII. That battle meant EVERYTHING
    Not for countries with less than 100 provinces.

    Your oppinion on japan is hardly correct. Jpana was well known, and their fleet was respective.

    Naval battles meaned nothing. The ability to cripple enemy`s shipping after it was important.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts