+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 141

Thread: Paradox: PLEASE do an expansion totally overhauling the combat system

  1. #81
    Bring back bonuses for having a navy adjacent to armies.
    No Voting/Secret Ballots

  2. #82
    Alot of people are talking about doom stacks and AI issues but at a very base level the land system does not model the historical developing strategic and operational issues of the era. The land combat system misses the point of what occured between 1900 and 1925; the gas and tank elements that are designed to break a mythical deadlock are pretty much a fantasy in their own right and it fails to reflect any modern military analysis written since "oh what a lovely war". The 19th century stuff misses alot of strategic changes that occured as well which could be not only interesting but so much fun to play in a game.

    However, in comparison the naval system is much worse, its EU3 ported into a later era and thus makes no sense at an operational or strategic level and lacks anything I'd recognize from the era, try adding:

    Less naval areas
    A proper combat system
    A proper strategic system
    Mines (the era is defined by them , yes I know its hard to model in the current system but actually with a proper system it would be straight forwards)
    Operational deployment mechanism
    Classes of ships development
    The full set of ships.
    I could go on

    The system doesn't need tinkering with, it needs a total rebuild based on an indepth examination of what occured over the time frame so that the basic model reflects something we can recognize as warfare from the era. It doesn't even need to be as complex, just get the basics right first before adding layers of additional functionality and depth. Go out and buy a load of board games from the era and play around with them, work out what was fun and how they modeled stuff and start to think about how to make a new system from scratch rather than the cut and paste that we got.

    I would recommend working with the community so that the risk of another terrible military model is lowered.
    Last edited by Mowers; 08-04-2012 at 13:49.

  3. #83
    Covert Mastermind Demi Moderator Secret Master's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerCrusader Kings IICommander: Conquest of the AmericasDeus Vult
    Europa Universalis 3Divine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHearts of Iron III Collection
    Heir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineThe Kings CrusadeMagickaMarch of the Eagles
    EU3 Napoleon's AmbitionVictoria: RevolutionsEuropa Universalis: RomeSemper FiSengoku
    Ship Simulator ExtremesSword of the Stars IIVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    Rome: Vae VictisMount & Blade: WarbandWarlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordPride of Nations
    CK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    It's a secret, duh...
    Posts
    15,854
    How would you do mines in a way that wouldn't be a total abstraction or micromanagement hell?
    All Hail Him,

    The Secret Master

    Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.

  4. #84
    General The Arch Mede's Avatar
    Europa Universalis 3Europa Universalis: ChroniclesEU3 CompleteRome GoldVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House Divided

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In a Turkish Bath
    Posts
    2,254
    The best thing to do with naval combat in Vic2 is to get rid of ship units.

    Just have naval bases. The bigger the base and the better your tech, the larger and more powerful (and more expensive) the fleet based there is and the wider an area it projects control over. As long as you have some control, and no enemy power has any control, trade is uninterrupted and armies can be freely conveyed.

    Blockade happens on a sliding scale according to the relative power projected into the sea adjacent to a port and a degree of dominance is required to convey troops in wartime.

    When warring powers contest control of a seazone, from time to time there will be battle events that result in fleets being damaged. "Your Majesties Fleet out of Scapa Flow clashed with the Imperial High Seas Fleet out of Kiel in the Battle of Jutland. The fleet suffered damage which will reduce the effectiveness of Scapa Flow to 73% until it is repaired. The Imperial High Seas Fleet was soundly trounced and we estimate that the effectiveness of the Kiel naval base has been reduced to 9%."

  5. #85
    General The Arch Mede's Avatar
    Europa Universalis 3Europa Universalis: ChroniclesEU3 CompleteRome GoldVictoria 2
    Victoria II: A House Divided

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In a Turkish Bath
    Posts
    2,254
    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    How would you do mines in a way that wouldn't be a total abstraction or micromanagement hell?
    Whats wrong with abstractions? Use mine icons as a way of showing naval control.

  6. #86
    Covert Mastermind Demi Moderator Secret Master's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerCrusader Kings IICommander: Conquest of the AmericasDeus Vult
    Europa Universalis 3Divine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHearts of Iron III Collection
    Heir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineThe Kings CrusadeMagickaMarch of the Eagles
    EU3 Napoleon's AmbitionVictoria: RevolutionsEuropa Universalis: RomeSemper FiSengoku
    Ship Simulator ExtremesSword of the Stars IIVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    Rome: Vae VictisMount & Blade: WarbandWarlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordPride of Nations
    CK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    It's a secret, duh...
    Posts
    15,854
    It has been suggested before that mines be implemented as "forts" in sea zones, but there were some objections because mines are more complicated than that.

    I'm not really that knowledgeable about that sort of thing. About the only things I know about naval mines is that you could close certain areas off with them and that they were enough of a concern that the precious British dreadnoughts dared not operate in certain waters. Mines were cheap, dreadnoughts were not.
    All Hail Him,

    The Secret Master

    Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.

  7. #87
    East vs West developer kunadam's Avatar
    Achtung PanzerArsenal of DemocracyHearts of Iron 2: ArmageddonCities in MotionCrusader Kings II
    Darkest HourDeus VultEuropa Universalis 3Europa Universalis: ChroniclesEU3 Complete
    Divine WindFor The GloryFor the MotherlandGettysburgHearts of Iron III
    Hearts of Iron III CollectionHOI3: Their Finest HourHeir to the ThroneIron CrossKing Arthur II
    The Kings CrusadeLost Empire - ImmortalsMagickaMajesty 2March of the Eagles
    Victoria: RevolutionsRome GoldSemper FiSengokuSword of the Stars
    Sword of the Stars IISupreme Ruler 2020 GoldStarvoidVictoria 2Victoria II: A House Divided
    Victoria II: Heart of DarknessMount & Blade: WarbandWarlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordWar of the Roses
    Hearts of Iron: The Card GamePride of Nations500k club

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    3,170
    What is the problem with the current system? And how would you address?
    Sincere question. Just stating that it is all wrong without offering an alternative is not a good idea.
    Also please remember, in the end nor the naval, nor the land combat simulation can have a hundred parameter with each soldier/salior being modeled...
    Game Developer East vs West - Softcoding Team / Research Apps. / The Map 1
    Arsenal of Democracy Technical Team Mod2
    Hungarian leaders for HoI2 3 / Hungarian Improvement for HoI34

  8. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    How would you do mines in a way that wouldn't be a total abstraction or micromanagement hell?
    You would hire a specific mine laying unit. You could do it on your own or set it to auto. They would cost a little bit per placement, sort of like forts but alot cheaper. It would Damage enemies attacking you a bit, more if you have a fortification, and it would decimate enemies retreating into a province.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by kunadam View Post
    What is the problem with the current system? And how would you address?
    Sincere question. Just stating that it is all wrong without offering an alternative is not a good idea.
    Also please remember, in the end nor the naval, nor the land combat simulation can have a hundred parameter with each soldier/salior being modeled...
    Did you even read the OP? I said go to the HOI move = attack system.


    —V

  10. #90
    Lt. General Kyoumen's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Darkest Australia
    Posts
    1,288
    Quote Originally Posted by kunadam View Post
    What is the problem with the current system? And how would you address?
    Sincere question. Just stating that it is all wrong without offering an alternative is not a good idea.
    Also please remember, in the end nor the naval, nor the land combat simulation can have a hundred parameter with each soldier/salior being modeled...
    Well, insofar as the naval system goes, the problem is manyfold:

    1) Because navies can operate indefinitely (and the AI isn't even subject to attrition), the strategic effect of controlling naval bases and coaling ports is essentially nil, making e.g. most of the Pacific completely worthless except for prestige.

    2) There is absolutely no real significance to navy composition except that bigger and more modern ship types is better, and it is trivial for any player of a large country to annihilate the Royal Navy in a single war (often easily if you rush ironclads or dreadnoughts before the AI does); the concept of a naval arms race or balance of power isn't reflected in the game at all, and there is no mechanical representation as to why France couldn't simply outbuild Britain's navy.

    3) The primary uses of navies are in safeguarding of trade lanes, denial of trade to other powers, and soft power projection. You have some representation of the second with the war exhaustion effect of blockading (but this doesn't reflect land trade routes, trade with neutral powers, and is completely pointless against landlocked foes and unfairly powerful against, e.g., Austria), but this is otherwise unrepresented in the game.

    4) Even with the changes in patches and AHD, countries still can and do routinely field navies that are enormously larger than any country ever boasted in real life; a powerful player nation or the UK will not-infrequently boast a navy that would compare favourably with that of every real-world country in the world combined.

    5) The extreme changes that the dreadnought (and obsolescence of earlier battleship types) wrought on the scene, and the changes in naval warfare style stemming from the fact that dreadnoughts were obscenely expensive and thus a potentially massive loss in life, prestige, and wealth to any country that risked them in battle, is not reflected in the game in any meaningful way. Nor is the impact of smaller cheaper units such as torpedo boats (and the cost/effectiveness calculations of a small fleet of torpedo boats versus one dreadnought) in the game.

    6) Finally, while aircraft carriers can be justified being left out of the game because while they existed their historical impact was minor until the end of the Victoria II period (though there is no reason that HAD to be the case, and any large war in the 1920s could certainly have seen a decisive role for aircraft carriers), submarines were a tremendously effective and potentially decisive weapon of offensive warfare for the latter half of the period and saw action in many conflicts, including of course World War I, so their lack of representation is very bad - though the real problem isn't that submarines aren't a unit, but that at the moment they would be a completely useless unit just as they were in Victoria I because there is no way to represent how they were most effectively used (to attack merchant shipping).

    Ultimately, as I noted before, I do not believe combat is or should be a major focus of Victoria II per se; what I would like to see is a naval overhaul focusing more on the soft power and trade interdiction/protection roles of navies. The economy is the centre of Victoria II; the naval role should focus on how it relates to that, especially since that is exactly what was central to the centrepiece conflict of the period, where both Germany and Britain's naval efforts were focused primarily on economic strangulation of the other.

  11. #91
    Second Lieutenant ZhangWuJi's Avatar
    Europa Universalis 3

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    China/Canada
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    How would you do mines in a way that wouldn't be a total abstraction or micromanagement hell?
    Instead of mine layers, like suggested, why not code something like (I don't know the code names): if your port is being blockaded, then mine explosion events could trigger. Or just code that blockading ships take random amounts of damage or something.

    Could limit to core ports too if we wanted to prevent it from getting out of hand

  12. #92
    East vs West developer kunadam's Avatar
    Achtung PanzerArsenal of DemocracyHearts of Iron 2: ArmageddonCities in MotionCrusader Kings II
    Darkest HourDeus VultEuropa Universalis 3Europa Universalis: ChroniclesEU3 Complete
    Divine WindFor The GloryFor the MotherlandGettysburgHearts of Iron III
    Hearts of Iron III CollectionHOI3: Their Finest HourHeir to the ThroneIron CrossKing Arthur II
    The Kings CrusadeLost Empire - ImmortalsMagickaMajesty 2March of the Eagles
    Victoria: RevolutionsRome GoldSemper FiSengokuSword of the Stars
    Sword of the Stars IISupreme Ruler 2020 GoldStarvoidVictoria 2Victoria II: A House Divided
    Victoria II: Heart of DarknessMount & Blade: WarbandWarlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordWar of the Roses
    Hearts of Iron: The Card GamePride of Nations500k club

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    3,170
    Quote Originally Posted by Veritas555 View Post
    Did you even read the OP? I said go to the HOI move = attack system.
    Yes I did. That is far from a complete overhaul of the combat mechanism. For me the combat mechanism is the strange algorithm of attacks, defence/thoughness, softness of the HoI3 system. I.e. how combat is resolved once it commences. The naval system in HoI also gets its fair share of criticism.
    Game Developer East vs West - Softcoding Team / Research Apps. / The Map 1
    Arsenal of Democracy Technical Team Mod2
    Hungarian leaders for HoI2 3 / Hungarian Improvement for HoI34

  13. #93
    Lt. General Mikeboy's Avatar
    Cities in Motion 2Crusader Kings IIEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesHearts of Iron III CollectionMarch of the Eagles
    Victoria: RevolutionsSengokuSupreme Ruler: Cold WarVictoria 2Victoria II: A House Divided
    Victoria II: Heart of Darkness500k club

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK, circa 1912
    Posts
    1,339
    Personally I prefer the late game (which is more developed playing APD) so as I've said before I'd like to see a WW1 expansion that improves on the late game. A lot of the points people have made about navies are quite valid, I think one think that should be added is engagement chances, that way you could have it so massive fleets hanging around Jutland are likely to engage but passing ships in the Atlantic won't always detect each other. This would also allow submarines with very small engagement chances to actually have a purpose and there could be something of a tech war caused by this. (trying to get inventions which increase your chance of detecting the enemy). Also aircraft are just-about completely ignored, hell even in WW1 the Germans had a bomber capable of striking London yet currently they're just another type of land unit. I think a HOI3 style system would be good here.
    Amanda Shaw, Secretary of the Interior (b. 1890)
    in BigBadBob's The Presidents 1836-1936 an Interactive V2 AAR

    Alfonz Aljaz of the State of the South Slavs (b. 1800)
    in theAhawks's A Federation of "Equals"

    Empire's dead, the issues inherent with creating a functional mod of that timespan are just too much.

  14. #94
    Covert Mastermind Demi Moderator Secret Master's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerCrusader Kings IICommander: Conquest of the AmericasDeus Vult
    Europa Universalis 3Divine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHearts of Iron III Collection
    Heir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineThe Kings CrusadeMagickaMarch of the Eagles
    EU3 Napoleon's AmbitionVictoria: RevolutionsEuropa Universalis: RomeSemper FiSengoku
    Ship Simulator ExtremesSword of the Stars IIVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    Rome: Vae VictisMount & Blade: WarbandWarlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordPride of Nations
    CK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    It's a secret, duh...
    Posts
    15,854
    Quote Originally Posted by ZhangWuJi View Post
    Instead of mine layers, like suggested, why not code something like (I don't know the code names): if your port is being blockaded, then mine explosion events could trigger. Or just code that blockading ships take random amounts of damage or something.

    Could limit to core ports too if we wanted to prevent it from getting out of hand
    Well, I can see why people like those kinds of ideas. But the current system only allows blockades off the coast of a port. You can't intercept shipping anywhere else, so under this model blockade = losing ships to mines. Historically, it seems more like you should be intercepting shipping all over the place, but the mines keep you from getting too close to specific harbors. German mines didn't seem to stop the blockade the RN held against them. It did, however, make pursuing them at Jutland a risky proposition (along with the threat of U-boat and torpedo boat ambushes).
    All Hail Him,

    The Secret Master

    Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.

  15. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    How would you do mines in a way that wouldn't be a total abstraction or micromanagement hell?
    I do not believe the current naval model is worth keeping; so without first defining what we want the new naval model to represent and the weight we wish to add to the various dynamics and how we want those dynamics to evolve over the time frame it is not possible, at this time, to define what and how the mines would be represented.

    This may seem like an opt out but as the naval model does not represent in a realistic, plausible or fun way the changing strategic and operational challenges of the era defining the implementation of mines before the definition of the model would be unfeasible.

    So perhaps I ought to define a new model? Maybe, but its a couple of weeks worth of work and unless someone wants to pay my daily defence analysis consultancy rate then its unlikely that I will add this task to my current consultancy jobs. That may sound like a convinent opt out but rather, like alot of people, I've a mortgage and school fees (and a board game addiction) to pay.
    Last edited by Mowers; 09-04-2012 at 21:15.

  16. #96
    Covert Mastermind Demi Moderator Secret Master's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerCrusader Kings IICommander: Conquest of the AmericasDeus Vult
    Europa Universalis 3Divine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHearts of Iron III Collection
    Heir to the ThroneEuropa Universalis III: In NomineThe Kings CrusadeMagickaMarch of the Eagles
    EU3 Napoleon's AmbitionVictoria: RevolutionsEuropa Universalis: RomeSemper FiSengoku
    Ship Simulator ExtremesSword of the Stars IIVictoria 2Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of Darkness
    Rome: Vae VictisMount & Blade: WarbandWarlock: Master of the ArcaneMount & Blade: With Fire and SwordPride of Nations
    CK2: Holy Knight500k clubEuropa Universalis IV

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    It's a secret, duh...
    Posts
    15,854
    Quote Originally Posted by Mowers View Post
    I do not believe the current naval model is worth keeping; so without first defining what we want the new naval model to represent and the weight we wish to add to the various dynamics and how we want those dynamics to evolve over the time frame it is not possible, at this time, to define what and how the mines would be represented.
    Well, I kind of expected this would be your answer.

    The reason I brought it up is because I tend to agree that mines in no way really fit the current naval model. The catch is that I can think of ways to implement them, but they all either end up being abstracted as "Forts in sea zones/additional attrition in mined sea zones," which would be a pointless abstraction without a completely new naval damage/naval ORG mechanic, or it ends up being "Send the minelayer out on 150 missions to lay mines, while my enemy sends the minesweeper on 150 missions to find mines" which would end up being a micromanagement hell. This also does not factor in the cost of naval mines, which could be quite expensive when used extensively and how you would implement that in Vic2's economy.

    Personally, without something approximating either HOI3s convoy system or PoN's merchant shipping model, any discussing of mines, subs, or realistic fleets is more or less doomed to failure since the Vic2 model requires blockades to be initiated and maintained only off the coast of ports. Since you can't convoy raid in the middle of the ocean along sea lanes, subs are pointless, as are smaller, faster warships like cruisers.
    All Hail Him,

    The Secret Master

    Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.

  17. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    Well, I kind of expected this would be your answer.
    I wish had some thing more positive to say, I dislike being negative and I still believe that this game given resource and time could be great.


    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    The reason I brought it up is because I tend to agree that mines in no way really fit the current naval model. The catch is that I can think of ways to implement them, but they all either end up being abstracted as "Forts in sea zones/additional attrition in mined sea zones," which would be a pointless abstraction without a completely new naval damage/naval ORG mechanic, or it ends up being "Send the minelayer out on 150 missions to lay mines, while my enemy sends the minesweeper on 150 missions to find mines" which would end up being a micromanagement hell. This also does not factor in the cost of naval mines, which could be quite expensive when used extensively and how you would implement that in Vic2's economy.
    Agreed, it would be tedious, difficult and may never work properly eitherway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Secret Master View Post
    Personally, without something approximating either HOI3s convoy system or PoN's merchant shipping model, any discussing of mines, subs, or realistic fleets is more or less doomed to failure since the Vic2 model requires blockades to be initiated and maintained only off the coast of ports. Since you can't convoy raid in the middle of the ocean along sea lanes, subs are pointless, as are smaller, faster warships like cruisers.
    Again, agreed, the current model prohibits realistic blockades or mines which were the cornerstones of the era. The question I wonder is how the call was made in production to reproduce the same terrible naval system from ViC1.


    But to be constructive:
    I believe that making a simpler basic system with fewer naval zones combined with a mission based system could be the solution.
    IE you make an order, set the time frame & aggressiveness and the various fleets go on their way.
    I think it might be easier for the AI to handle this sort of system. Also it requires less resource to build.
    Combined with a more interesting production system (classes of ship) and naval facility support system (realistic support infrastructure challenges) it could a genuine challenge.

    Finally if a better naval system could be built perhaps it could form the basis for future games. It could be about time as the current system isn't far removed from EU1's naval system which is pushing a decade in age?

  18. #98
    Combat system should be like that of the Total war series... well it would be awesome. <_<

  19. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by Rangergxi View Post
    Combat system should be like that of the Total war series... well it would be awesome. <_<
    Hearts of Iron III tech and interface, Total war ideas for how to do combat, and the combat engine from men of war.

  20. #100
    a. If a battle doesn't go well, the AI should disengage instead of sending more and more troops. Ideally, it should retreat broken armies. A human player circles the units that are engaged in a major battle, while the AI keeps disorganised troops in the battle, leaving them to die from attrition or be encircled. I use the "home rule" of not recycling units, since this is one of the two worst exploits.
    b. As technology progresses, offensives on entrenched positions should become more and more costly in human lives. This should create the "illusion" of a front, since hostile armies would remain in neighbouring provinces, waiting for a chance to break the stalemate. As the game is now, even in the later years you do not need a 2:1 advantage to overwhelm a defending army of similar technology. Without tanks/gas, late game assaults against entrenched armies should be "suicidal". Early tanks should make things a little bit easier.
    "I have no fear, i have no hope, i am free" inscription on a greek writer's tombstone.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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