"Just" improving the AI is something people who don't know anything about coding say an awful lot.
- 25
AI Venice will never be competent until transport ships are removed.
- Thread starter Pellucid
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
What I'd suggest:
1. Let all ships carry troops.
2. Let merchant ships, you know, steer trade better.
3. Let light ships have the best blockade rating.
But most of all:
4. Create a system of naval interception at sea, so that there is a chance two enemy ships could, in fact, pass in the night. Sorties from a blockaded port would have a far higher chance to be intercepted. Chances to encounter an enemy in a deep sea area would be decreased.
Edit:
5. Also, allow "mercenary" ships you can hire. If you want to bolster your fleet with a bunch of merchant ships for a quick transport mission — do it! Make is so that the cost-to-purchase is lower, but the cost-for-maintenance is higher than a regular naval ship. (This came up when they first announced "privateering," which isn't really privateering the way it is implemented.)
1. Let all ships carry troops.
2. Let merchant ships, you know, steer trade better.
3. Let light ships have the best blockade rating.
But most of all:
4. Create a system of naval interception at sea, so that there is a chance two enemy ships could, in fact, pass in the night. Sorties from a blockaded port would have a far higher chance to be intercepted. Chances to encounter an enemy in a deep sea area would be decreased.
Edit:
5. Also, allow "mercenary" ships you can hire. If you want to bolster your fleet with a bunch of merchant ships for a quick transport mission — do it! Make is so that the cost-to-purchase is lower, but the cost-for-maintenance is higher than a regular naval ship. (This came up when they first announced "privateering," which isn't really privateering the way it is implemented.)
- 11
As a note, has it struck anyone else as weird that your "trade ships" are mostly small, fast warships (i.e. Frigates), while your "transport ships" are trading vessels (Cog, Flyte, Merchantman, East Indiaman)?
- 13
True, it would take some additional info to be kept for each ship: which regiment and how many troops are held.
We're in the realm of theory here, though. It's unlikely this would ever be implemented anyway
Not as odd as all that, because the trade-related missions are described as "protecting trade" (implication: by shooting people who try to interfere) and "privateering" (shooting at merchants and taking their stuff).
- 3
To really improve naval transportation would require such a host of factors that Paradox would end up with a new game, they could call it Magellan or Nelson or something similar.
Therefore, at the moment I feel simplification may be the answer.
I like the heavies or galleys can carry a regt that's it, no transport ships. It's not the heavy is doing the actual carrying its guarding the commandeered merchantman.
It would certainly change naval invasions for the player don't know if the AI could adapt to it though, colonial expansion would change too.
1444 England could only move 8 units at a time, more realistic I suppose, later game think of the cost in moving armies round abig empire, again more realistic, navies are very expensive. Removes daft things like Muscovy invading Scotland they just wouldn't have the ships or the money.
Galleys may need a rethink limiting them to inland seas would help but they are cheap so the likes of Sweden and Ottomans would be able to shuttle lots of troops around, so only heavies can transport troops, simple.
In fact you could change an idea in naval or trade to double transport capacity, that will appeal to colanial players.
Light ships stay the same in what they do.
Wether the AI can be made to adapt who knows.
Therefore, at the moment I feel simplification may be the answer.
I like the heavies or galleys can carry a regt that's it, no transport ships. It's not the heavy is doing the actual carrying its guarding the commandeered merchantman.
It would certainly change naval invasions for the player don't know if the AI could adapt to it though, colonial expansion would change too.
1444 England could only move 8 units at a time, more realistic I suppose, later game think of the cost in moving armies round abig empire, again more realistic, navies are very expensive. Removes daft things like Muscovy invading Scotland they just wouldn't have the ships or the money.
Galleys may need a rethink limiting them to inland seas would help but they are cheap so the likes of Sweden and Ottomans would be able to shuttle lots of troops around, so only heavies can transport troops, simple.
In fact you could change an idea in naval or trade to double transport capacity, that will appeal to colanial players.
Light ships stay the same in what they do.
Wether the AI can be made to adapt who knows.
- 1
The op is probably right, which is why HOI4 scrapped transports, as the AI can't cope.
Yes. I have been saying this since the start.
The trade ships (transports) in game should be 'protecting trade' and the light ships should act more like cavalry, get a combat bonus, and be still usable as privateers.
Which is why I suggested renaming that function to 'supporting merchants', which doesn't change the mechanic at all, but makes the flavour of the name fit merchant ships instead.
Put army on coastal provinice, push "embark" and wait the cooldown needed to accomplish the order, based on the troops number, now army is a transport fleet that can be moved like usual, you assign escort etc.
"
England invaded by everyone" problem solved
"
England invaded by everyone" problem solved
I wonder why naval operations are so often a problem for the AI in all kinds of strategy empire building games. Are there any gaming articles that analyze the phenomenon deeper?
- 1
I don't know how EU4's AI is implemented, but a naval component with moving troops around makes for a much broader and more complex decision tree. On land you can map out all possible troop movements and pick the one you want to do without too much computation. Moving across water greatly enhances the number of potential "end points" to the army's movement, which means lots more computations (and a real-time game like this can't just compute as much as it wants to or it'll slow way down). Additionally there are fresh considerations that have to come into play once the army is on the water -- you have to watch for enemy navies (& adjust as they move around / enter or leave fog-of-war / try to guess where they are if they're hidden in the fog), choose landing spots where you're not too likely to get ambushed before you can transport your entire army (assuming you have few enough transports that you have to move them in pieces) but still pick a landing spot that's tactically viable...
Essentially it's a super complicated thing. It's arguable whether or not it's more complex than land AI, but land AI is a necessity, and by the time you've finished writing it you may not have enough computation time left for good naval decision-making.
Further in EU4's case, land war and land AI have gotten a lot of attention while the navy has mostly languished. It's been tweaked a couple times, but Wiz has remarked about the need to completely rewrite it in order to have a "good" system. So basically there's a lot of legacy code in the way, and it just hasn't been high enough on the priority list yet to tackle. I keep hoping it'll be in the next DLC / patch, but the cry for internal politics has been even louder than the cry for a better naval game, thus the past two DLCs focused on that.
- 6
- 2
Completely agree net.split, amphibious warfare is the most complex military undertaking there is especially if you want to land on a hostile shore, history has more failures than successes. If in doubt read some good books on the Pacific war and remember the USA had resources coming out of their ears.
I go back to my earlier post, unless you super complex the game it has to be made super simple but reflect the flavour of sea power.
As for players suggesting interdiction of land provinces from the sea, come on, max range of a naval gun at end of EUIV is a mile tops, they are not the 16" guns of a Missouri class BB, blockade is as good as it gets
I go back to my earlier post, unless you super complex the game it has to be made super simple but reflect the flavour of sea power.
As for players suggesting interdiction of land provinces from the sea, come on, max range of a naval gun at end of EUIV is a mile tops, they are not the 16" guns of a Missouri class BB, blockade is as good as it gets
- 1
The original suggestion of OP would in my opinion enhance realism greatly. An army should be transported wholly, not piece by piece.
Already the EU engine complements the naval aspects of this time period in history competently. Before going into my own suggestions, I would like to repeat what Chamboozer said, since he pretty much ´nailed it´.
Interesting fights like the historical battle of Lepanto, is something one can reasonably expect to happen. Which plays both into the diplomatic aspect of the game (gaining important allies, with galleys - but also allies who are likely to be on site when the fight happens). Building such a galley fleet, usually involves both forehand planning but also the sacrifice of Barques and thus trade power. Cogs just don´t really play that much into it. One lands ones men in a safe location, and uses military access to get there. A few usually suffice. My Genoan games usually involve 2 or at the most 3 cogs for the first hundred years. When I do decide to have more (usually 10, for easy maths), its only to make it less time consuming for me to move the men around (though the new auto transport system is quite nice, it takes longer when the ships don´t enter harbor to pick up men) It would increase the immersion for me if the Cogs were done away with all together and replaced with 1) directly abstracted into movement cost when "strategically replacing" your men, (e.g. to deal with soon coming uprisings or preparing for a war or those pesky trans Atlantic enemies/independent minded.) 2) hiring of merchant ships etc., for the transporting of a whole army, which is intended for an important battle against a strong foe (similar to the mechanic already in place for rebels, with a thick yellow line underneath).
The rest of the ships, the Navies, job would be to secure dominion of the oceans something along the lines of;
Already the EU engine complements the naval aspects of this time period in history competently. Before going into my own suggestions, I would like to repeat what Chamboozer said, since he pretty much ´nailed it´.
Interesting fights like the historical battle of Lepanto, is something one can reasonably expect to happen. Which plays both into the diplomatic aspect of the game (gaining important allies, with galleys - but also allies who are likely to be on site when the fight happens). Building such a galley fleet, usually involves both forehand planning but also the sacrifice of Barques and thus trade power. Cogs just don´t really play that much into it. One lands ones men in a safe location, and uses military access to get there. A few usually suffice. My Genoan games usually involve 2 or at the most 3 cogs for the first hundred years. When I do decide to have more (usually 10, for easy maths), its only to make it less time consuming for me to move the men around (though the new auto transport system is quite nice, it takes longer when the ships don´t enter harbor to pick up men) It would increase the immersion for me if the Cogs were done away with all together and replaced with 1) directly abstracted into movement cost when "strategically replacing" your men, (e.g. to deal with soon coming uprisings or preparing for a war or those pesky trans Atlantic enemies/independent minded.) 2) hiring of merchant ships etc., for the transporting of a whole army, which is intended for an important battle against a strong foe (similar to the mechanic already in place for rebels, with a thick yellow line underneath).
The rest of the ships, the Navies, job would be to secure dominion of the oceans something along the lines of;
I, for one, think that the war mechanics (land and sea) in this game are terribly undeveloped. Having a game focusing so much on map painting and expanding your territory (usually) by the means of war is odd to have such a watered down design. I´m thinking about supply system, lack of any kind of front in wars (forts kind of make up for this) strategical planning, ease of conquering far away lands without any problem when the logistics in the era where... well, underdeveloped at best.
It´s ok that they focus on internal development, heck, i wanted that as much as anyone. But even then, this is principally a wargame, at least in the way it was conceived and precisely the war part is very lacking, for my taste at least.
Tl,dr: just another internet rant
It´s ok that they focus on internal development, heck, i wanted that as much as anyone. But even then, this is principally a wargame, at least in the way it was conceived and precisely the war part is very lacking, for my taste at least.
Tl,dr: just another internet rant
I've read through this entire thread and there are some great suggestions so I think we need a dev to get in here and give their say on the matter, also because of what this thread has become, the title is a bit misleading.
- 1
"AI Nations With a Lot of Island Provinces" didn't fit in the subject line.
I was thinking more along the lines of "Big/Needed Changes to the Naval System""AI Nations With a Lot of Island Provinces" didn't fit in the subject line.
Please no... Don't pollute EUIV with Civ5 stupid transport system.
I don't really think AI strives to know how many transport it needs. AI failing at squashing revolts on islands is a thing of the past when naval AI was as dumb as......... Now only tiny OPM should strive with revolts on islands really. If the problem is about colonial wars, then there are much more elegant solutions, just like vultures jumping on you, or increased attrition for non local mercenaries (would need ability to hire local mercenaries), or hudge attrition increase with each month at sea (you wouldn't get many casualties from crossing the Mediterranea but going from England to China should kill a load of your men) or simply hudge increase in reinforce cost for overseas troops, because it's more costly to reinforce your napoleon square in ennemy Chinese lands than in mainland Europe.
I don't really think AI strives to know how many transport it needs. AI failing at squashing revolts on islands is a thing of the past when naval AI was as dumb as......... Now only tiny OPM should strive with revolts on islands really. If the problem is about colonial wars, then there are much more elegant solutions, just like vultures jumping on you, or increased attrition for non local mercenaries (would need ability to hire local mercenaries), or hudge attrition increase with each month at sea (you wouldn't get many casualties from crossing the Mediterranea but going from England to China should kill a load of your men) or simply hudge increase in reinforce cost for overseas troops, because it's more costly to reinforce your napoleon square in ennemy Chinese lands than in mainland Europe.