AUTO-MERGE. No thanks.

[spinoza013]

You could just split and then mothball part of trade fleet so it won't auto merge but I would say it is silly to risk your trade fleet if you are fighting a superior naval power anyway.

So it never occurs that a superior naval power suddenly declares war on you while your trade fleet is at sea. Or do you just never have any ships at sea on the off chance you get ambushed?

The counter argument included the suggestion that If trading in the Mediterranean you add galleys to your trade fleet rather than heavy ships, the suggestion to add heavy ships was mainly for trading outside of inland seas. Also, people pointed out that splitting your fleet does not make it any less vulnerable than having it in one group unless you are really good at micro, in many cases it makes it more vulnerable.

I'm sorry but as I pointed out if you have 6 light ships having 2 galleys and 4 lightships instead would be pointless, not only would they not be a deterrant but their upkeep would eat into your trade income making having a trade fleet pointless anyway.

None of these are arguments for not making it optional. As I've stated I think merging trade fleets is a desirable improvement but don't tell me it's not at the cost of some gaming freedom if it isn't made optional because you'd be wrong. You can't argue that on any level.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

As I've stated I think merging trade fleets is a desirable improvement but don't tell me it's not at the cost of some gaming freedom if it isn't made optional because you'd be wrong. You can't argue that on any level.

Yes you can, you just keep ignoring it.

Interface space. Address it. It's an actual consideration for including features, and I can't believe why you're refusing to understand this.

 

[spinoza013]

It's entirely optional just now whether you merge your fleets or not. The only whining being done is by people who find it a little too much work to click a few boxes but instead need everything done for them.

 

[spinoza013]

Would having auto merge trade fleets remove the ability to have separate fleets. Yes

Is having separate fleets a freedom we have just now. Yes

Would we have less freedom after the auto merge change. Yes

Do you have some cognitive disfunction?

 

[spinoza013]

You know what's a waste of "interface real estate" ?

Having a button on Heavy and Light ships that allow Allied troops to use them.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

It's entirely optional just now whether you merge your fleets or not. The only whining being done is by people who find it a little too much work to click a few boxes but instead need everything done for them.

Would having auto merge trade fleets remove the ability to have separate fleets. Yes

Is having separate fleets a freedom we have just now. Yes

Would we have less freedom after the auto merge change. Yes

Do you have some cognitive disfunction?

So now you're saying that the tedium of micro-management for a majority of players (and hey, you've already admitted that you yourself would think auto-merge is a good thing) is better than the option to do something that the majority of players wouldn't do?

That's not obviously correct. You're going to have to argue for that.

Freedom of player choice does not necessarily make a better game. By that logic, everyone has the choice to not abuse the current HRE mechanics to revoke the privilegia in 50 years, so it shouldn't be addressed in a patch.

Yes, that's an extreme analogy using a massive exploit, and I'm obviously not trying to use that to say that splitting trade fleets is in any way comparable to game-breaking things. No, what I'm using that example for is to show that freedom of choice does not automatically trump every other consideration.

You actually have to argue for what you're asserting, you can't just say it and expect everyone to agree with you.

You know what's a waste of "interface real estate" ?

Having a button on Heavy and Light ships that allow Allied troops to use them.

Is it? Because that's something that actually has a tangible impact on the game. Being able to transport, say, an ally of yours that has a large powerful army but no fleet is something that could be very useful.

But the advantages you've tried to argue for in this thread for splitting trade fleets are either controversial or of minimal impact.

 

[spinoza013]

Basic small country 101. When you begin a game you scrap your heavy ships or transports and invest in Light Ships. Now why would that be the standard move since the game came out if protecting trade required heavy ships or galleys? Instead you split your trade fleets. It's a standard tactic. Just because you want to blob out at speed 5 and can't be bothered with a bit of hassle standard tactics have to be scrapped. It's BS.

 

[spinoza013]

And no way is it an exploit. You're really getting desperate now.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

Basic small country 101. When you begin a game you scrap your heavy ships or transports and invest in Light Ships. Now why would that be the standard move since the game came out if protecting trade required heavy ships or galleys? Instead you split your trade fleets. It's a standard tactic. Just because you want to blob out at speed 5 and can't be bothered with a bit of hassle standard tactics have to be scrapped. It's BS.

And no way is it an exploit. You're really getting desperate now.

Would it kill you to quote the people you're responding to? I'm really not sure what the context for these are, or who you're responding to.

And if that second quote was about my last post:

Actually read things.

Actually read things.

Actually. Read. Things.

Yes, that's an extreme analogy using a massive exploit, and I'm obviously not trying to use that to say that splitting trade fleets is in any way comparable to game-breaking things. No, what I'm using that example for is to show that freedom of choice does not automatically trump every other consideration.

 

[spinoza013]

I admit I didn't read your post correctly I apologise.

I'd just like to say for those that suggest supporting my trade fleet with heavy ships are you expecting me to do that manually? Seems like a lot of hassle. Why can't we have a merge button for that too? Just have a big merge all fleets button.

Yes I'm being facetious

 

[clockworkBabbag]

I'd just like to say for those that suggest supporting my trade fleet with heavy ships are you expecting me to do that manually? Seems like a lot of hassle. Why can't we have a merge button for that too? Just have a big merge all fleets button.

Here's the other problem: nobody has been saying that you should be using heavy ships to support a tiny trade fleet. Heavy ships were mentioned in the context of large fleets, because that's the only time it would ever be reasonable to use them in a trade fleet.

Also, nobody's really talking about heavy ships anymore. The significant thing to think about with regards to very small naval force limits is not how to defend your trade fleet, it's about how much of a setback losing a small trade fleet is. Depending on how significant (or insignificant) it is, many people could feel that splitting your fleet to defend it when it's small isn't worth the time and effort of the micro management.

However, you actually do have a point now that might be worth discussing. The point of auto-merge was that it's tedious to do it manually and also can subtract from your trade income for a month or so depending on how/when you do it. Trying to merge heavy ships would have the same effect.

There's two reasons I can think of why people didn't ask for that. Either adding heavy ships to a trade fleet is something people do far less frequently than adding light ships (build 20-30 heavy ships once, add them to the trade fleet, never do it again) or it's something people don't do at all because they don't think it's worth the maintenance.

The second option is probably the one you're trying to imply. But then you have to remember something else about larger fleets - a larger trade fleet will take fewer losses slower than a smaller one, even without heavy ships. Splitting trade fleets likely guarantees that a split stack will be completely wiped, while all your ships at once will probably survive with damage that can be repaired but fewer permanent losses.

Even if you have a way to split ships that always guarantees that the maximum loss from splitting is less than the minimum loss for a full stack, when you're talking about large trade fleets you're not considering OPMs anymore. These are giant trade powers that probably have the most trade in their home node through controlling CoTs and provinces, and the trade fleet is basically just used to completely dominate the node. Even if you lose more ships from a merged stack than from split ones, making up the losses is not a massive setback. You have the income to quickly rebuild ships at that point.

 

[oblio-]

Basic small country 101. When you begin a game you scrap your heavy ships or transports and invest in Light Ships. Now why would that be the standard move since the game came out if protecting trade required heavy ships or galleys? Instead you split your trade fleets. It's a standard tactic. Just because you want to blob out at speed 5 and can't be bothered with a bit of hassle standard tactics have to be scrapped. It's BS.

If it's such a "standard tactic", why haven't the developers thought about it? And why did they outright "remove it"?
I only play single player, and I've never split my fleets just "in case" in many hundreds of hours of EU4, with countries big and small, from around the world.
But the developers mostly test this game in multiplayer - so if it's a "standard tactic" they should have probably hit this.

You're focusing on the wrong solution, I believe this is called "fanaticism", by some.
What you actually want is a real fix:
- naval retreats (so if you're attacked you can just run away with those ships, just as you do with troops - perhaps with some limitations to prevent abuse in multiplayer?)
or
- auto-exile on DoW for ships with the "Hide during wars" checkbox checked

 

[josh127]

What you actually want is a real fix:
- naval retreats (so if you're attacked you can just run away with those ships)
or
- auto-exile on DoW for ships with the "Hide during wars" checkbox checked

Could probably combine those two to make it a nice feature that would feel more realistic. When set to return to port at war, the fleet tries to get back to port. If it is caught it tries to evade damage and get to port ASAP (it will auto disengage without the player babysitting it). Speed is the best weapon of the light ship, so the fact that it is focusing on it should give it a better chance to get out of the battle alive, at the cost of dealing less damage in the process. The primary goal of that feature would be to avoid the common naval wars that end completely one sided without the need for player interaction.

I know, I suggested exile because it's an existing mechanic that seems to fit. However, I do think that flag needs to be limited as possible, and combining the options as you put them sound better to me.

On a side note, I wonder what will happen in Alexandria where you can protect trade on both the red sea and Mediterranean side while having TI for the ocean route between the two areas.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

Could probably combine those two to make it a nice feature that would feel more realistic. When set to return to port at war, the fleet tries to get back to port. If it is caught it tries to evade damage and get to port ASAP (it will auto disengage without the player babysitting it). Speed is the best weapon of the light ship, so the fact that it is focusing on it should give it a better chance to get out of the battle alive, at the cost of dealing less damage in the process. The primary goal of that feature would be to avoid the common naval wars that end completely one sided without the need for player interaction.

I'm very much on board for this. It also fits with how ships on a trade mission normally act where you don't have the "go home" option set: they disengage automatically from battles as soon as they can.

 

[unillogical]

All they have to do is put a button in the trade screen, then people can decide for themselves, job done.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

All they have to do is put a button in the trade screen, then people can decide for themselves, job done.

Where? There's even less space on the trade screen than there is on the fleet screen.

 

[Cataphract887]

The button could easily be placed in the options screen.(esc->options)

I only play single player, and I've never split my fleets just "in case" in many hundreds of hours of EU4, with countries big and small, from around the world.

If you had a hundred hours of MP you would probably have the experience by now of a player, totally out of the blue, issuing a DOW and at the same moment his warships instantly sinking your entire trade fleet without your being able to respond or take any action. That will become much easier to do when fleets auto merge by default. I just hope the AI is taught how to do it.

 

[clockworkBabbag]

The button could easily be placed in the options screen.(esc->options)

So, it's not in an easy-to-access place and you don't have individual control over nodes? It's either merge all your fleets or none of them? I feel like I'm just constantly repeating myself, because I've addressed this being implemented as a game option previously in this thread.

There really is no good place for a button that I can think of or that has been proposed. The only even adequate place I can think of is on the actual trade node screen, but that's hardly ideal. But if you absolutely had to have it be an option, that's where I'd put it.

 

[oblio-]

The button could easily be placed in the options screen.(esc->options)



If you had a hundred hours of MP you would probably have the experience by now of a player, totally out of the blue, issuing a DOW and at the same moment his warships instantly sinking your entire trade fleet without your being able to respond or take any action. That will become much easier to do when fleets auto merge by default. I just hope the AI is taught how to do it.

1. What this game needs is not more buttons.
2. Yes, I thought about multiplayer as well. The developers do as well - they said they balance the game for multiplayer. I doubt their fleets don't get sniped
That's why we need something smarter that "add another button", see the proposal in the posts above.

 

[AndPimentel]

The only whining being done is by people who find it a little too much work to click a few boxes but instead need everything done for them.

wow. Who cares about that right? Let's have 200 new boxes for each action in the game! Because THAT'S FUN!