Blockades

[Sparrow]

Is it possible to setup blockades to interdict trade? I note in the one aar that the player has established a precense in Nigeria to interdict the slave trade. However will the USN be able to blockade the coast of the CSA and reduce the CSA' ability to trade? Or will trade goods not be effected by this?

 

[Spruce]

blockades are in, there's a screeny with the button "blockade"...

I already started a thread about it, but it didn't get much feedback from the developers.

My point was = blockades most often needed a huge amount of resources to render it effective. The Union blockaded fairly effective the confederate ports - when the blockade started the chance at being caught was about 1/10. When the amount of blockaders got higher and tactics improved the chance was 50/50.

Nevertheless some incidious captains cept on running the blockade and making huge profits. So a blockade should never be 100% imho, but pricing is severly affected trough it.

And another remark is the importance of the main body of the merchant fleet. This main body are the big - slow ships that will only break a blockade when it's not succesfull.

the first years of the blockade some Mexican gulf confederate ports were not effectively blockaded and trade continued in most cases.

A new question I have is, what happens when you are at war and your ally borders you. Can you ship goods to the world market from your friends port?

Yet another new question, when you are at the European continent, is the blockade less effective? You just buy the goods via land connections, no need to worry from the blockades,

 

[unmerged(9895)]

i would hope effective blockades would be part of the game. in fact, i would hope that intelligent use of a navy is a major part of spreading the power of your grand empire. since the begining of the modern age, and even earlier, the rise of fall of most nations resembles the rise and fall of the power of its navy. later patches of EU improved the ability of a navy to affect more than just sea-warefare, and i believe victoria will improve apon this even more.

 

[unmerged(11439)]

i don't know what blockading does in EUII but HOI is a lot more effective but not nearly as good as it should be. For example Britian can be completely blockaded and still get resources off of the world market.

 

[L G]

Doesnt seem that blockading has any effect upon the world market in hoi.... better be different in viccy

 

[John Poole]

Seems to me that WWI would be unsimulatable without blockades. The Germans better make sure they have all their Ersatz technology ready .

 

[unmerged(3168)]

Originally posted by L G
Doesnt seem that blockading has any effect upon the world market in hoi.... better be different in viccy

It could be different because you now have a value attached to all goods. So you could just increase the value of goods by a factor relating to how well you are being blockaded and or how many ports you have.

 

[Spruce]

refering to my earlier posts, a blockade should be something like this =

- depending on the amount of ships the blockader has,
- depending on the amount of enemy ports to blockade,
- depending on the land access to major markets,

the output will be a drop in world market trade from 0% to 90%.

Blockades are never 100% effective, need a lot of resources and are fairly senseless when the blockaded has land acces to major markets.

There's a huge difference in the - resource consuming - blockade of the Union against the confederacy AND the blockade from the UK against germany in WWI,

don't underestimate the fact that the Union had bairly enough warships to blockade one confederate port at the beginning of the war, giving also the fact that the confederates sea worthy ports ranged between 10-20,

 

[unmerged(11439)]

it would be cool if the amount you could blockade workd\ed in with ship techs

Civil war 80% Blockade Efficiency
Spanish-American 85%
WWI 90%
something like that

 

[Mefistofeles]

I think I read somewhere that blockades were less succesful during later times actually. With engines n'stuff more ports could be accessed and there was no way to blockade them all. Also the sheer number of merchant ships increased a lot. The invention of submarines also made it impossible to operate continously close to the enemy shores. Thus the blockading started becoming more of interdiction on the high seas rather than continous blockades in the seas of the enemy.

Then again I might merely be talking out of my arse as I admittedly don't know a lot about blockades.


Mef

 

[Spruce]

Originally posted by Mefistofeles
I think I read somewhere that blockades were less succesful during later times actually. With engines n'stuff more ports could be accessed and there was no way to blockade them all. Also the sheer number of merchant ships increased a lot. The invention of submarines also made it impossible to operate continously close to the enemy shores. Thus the blockading started becoming more of interdiction on the high seas rather than continous blockades in the seas of the enemy.

Then again I might merely be talking out of my arse as I admittedly don't know a lot about blockades.


Mef

exactly that's why I started this thread. To avoid that "blockading" ad hoc by the enemy destroys you...

 

[KINGBEN]

Does anyone know if it is possible to place sanctions on other nations, like EU2 where you could close your centers of trade to others.

 

[Gothmog]

Since this game has both the American Civil War and WWI in it, I trust there will be a blockade system... I just hope it will be well implemented.

 

[Spruce]

yeah,

exactly. I'm not breaking down on the blockade item ... because i haven't played the game yet off course

I only want to express my curiosity about the item and avoiding that it resembles too mucht the simplified EU2 blockades...

 

[nomoi]

it is the naval power rise era so the navy must be very very much important than the EU's. blockading must bu something you try your best to avoid. in EU2:

- Sir, your port of Morea is blockaded by the venetians.
- Really. Forget it. We have lots of them.

This must definitely change.

imperialism style blockading is a kind of example but it is too simple for vicky. but it is all i can think now.

Also i think gibraltar-tangiers and dardanelles should mean someting to the owner like panama and suez canals which will surely give some positive effects to its' owner.

it is possible to make this i think;

i.e - if ottomans are at war with russia and russia want to go through dardanelles, some of their ships can be damaged or sunk while passing. it also adds extra importance to gibraltar too and the makes it strategically important. (canakkale - gallipoli - war can be an example)

 

[Culise]

Well, in the instances of Gibraltar and the Strait of Marmara, if a power has ships their and another country they're at war with tries to pass, there is an automatic interception, as opposed to the lesser percentage chances in other naval regions. There are, of course, more sea territories where this holds true (The Skaggerack, for instance), but there is a benefit to holding these territories as national waters. A lack of attrition means you can camp a massive navy in this territory and block any enemy traffic in or out of the Black Sea (Marmara), the Mediterranean Sea (Gibraltar), or the Baltic Sea (Skaggerack)