Building a hit-and-run navy to grind down larger and stronger enemies

[Gort11]

This is due to the current naval hit chance error (a multiplier that was set to 2 instead of 0.5) that heavily reduces torp hit chance so it may work in current patches but not in the next one

Is that moddable, d'you think?

 

[Alexander 'The Grape']

Is that moddable, d'you think?

Yes, its just setting HIT_PROFILE_SPEED_FACTOR from 2 to 0.5 in defines. It's planned to be fixed in the next patch either way

 

[Cavalry]

. I've found that convoy raiding with a large fleet is the fastest way to force a decisive battle in the current naval system

That's why we need to start convoy raiding far from their home base. It takes time for the escort to appear, and it take more time for the strike force to come. And we didn't fight the strike force now but retreat and do convoy raiding again. The AI may divide the remain screens from strike force for escort.

And then the AI know they don't have screens and their strike force refuse to go out and fight. Now another thing to solve.

 

[Corpse Fool]

There is only one thing I can think of: carriers tend to lose panes and can't refill them in combat.

Why not just park 20 carriers in a different zone, and launch the planes into the enemy forces?

 

[Alexander 'The Grape']

Why not just park 20 carriers in a different zone, and launch the planes into the enemy forces?

AA losses. Without the 10x damage bonus/sortie from being in carrier combat, your losses will be 10x greater

 

[FeliciaDarkvoir]

I recall attempting a hit-and-run fleet before that attempted to abuse retreat speeds, as well as manually and instantly ordering a retreat when the fleet arrived. As I understood, there are certain classes of weapon which get to launch a salvo of attacks first which I was attempting to abuse in order to damage the enemy capitals and then scarper immeadietly.

This remains interesting to me conceptually, because, if the person you are playing against is using automatic split off- subs can capitalise on the enemy fleets retreating capitals. On the other hand, if your enemy leaves limping heavy ships in their fleet to continue to exert dominance, does that then enable ammassed naval bombers to become viable again even against AA BBs?

Eitherway, I think I find the idea of first striking very odd if it is to kill screens, because, ultimately this won't change the war in your favour unless you can force the engagement before they replace and you have relevant torpedo craft to take advantage of it in a longer conflict.

The other thing I would mention in my scattered recollections is; beware the technological cost of your solution. Turkey, Greece/Byzantium, Australia, Spain, these are great nations for naval building capacity... they aren't great for slots. The more types of ship you have to produce, and the more advanced the engines you require the less viable the whole approach becomes.


(Complete aside, does Romania still have the most fantastically intresting though almost pointless naval designers? Haven't played in a while, but I always remeber looking at Romanian ship designers and thinking - "why don't other nations have these?!")

 

[pro.gamer.69]

from being in carrier combat

is this actually necessary for the bonus? I was under the impression that the whole "DNE carrier stack" ban was based on them still getting the bonus without risking themselves.

 

[Alexander 'The Grape']

is this actually necessary for the bonus? I was under the impression that the whole "DNE carrier stack" ban was based on them still getting the bonus without risking themselves.

Yes, the defines read "NAVAL_STRIKE_CARRIER_MULTIPLIER = 10.0, -- damage bonus when planes are in naval combat where their carrier is present (and can thus sortie faster and more effectively)" - you only get this bonus in combat

 

[Cavalry]

AA losses. Without the 10x damage bonus/sortie from being in carrier combat, your losses will be 10x greater

Wait, without the 10x damage then the damage just 10x smaller?! That's good enough and probably the only way for a fleet of 20 carriers to catch some ships. If one have 20 carriers, the other better stay in port.

 

[CrasherZZ]

Don't really need any more than the highest tech subs, destroyers, CLs, and NAVs to dominate the seas. That would be a true hit-and-run navy. Don't waste IC on large ships that eat fuel and have limited uses.

 

[Alexander 'The Grape']

Don't really need any more than the highest tech subs, destroyers, CLs, and NAVs to dominate the seas. That would be a true hit-and-run navy. Don't waste IC on large ships that eat fuel and have limited uses.

If the enemy has AA on their ships, land navs are now not very IC efficient

 

[Iwo Jima]

Would something like this actually work? Thinking along the lines of as a minor nation like Turkey, who could afford the resources to build this small but powerful type of task force even though they start with very little in the way of an existing navy. Does the Surface Raiders naval spirit actually apply to both Carriers and Heavy Cruisers, or is strict enough to only include Battleships/Battlecruisers? Id start testing all this myself but I have some work I have to take care of, so in the meantime would be interested in your experience/opinion on the idea.

While naval game is funny, you should clearly understand, what is your goal for navy and who is your enemy.

Killing enemy ships is not a goal. The possible goal is support your landing. Defend your trade lines, Kill enemy convoys. Depend on this you should plan your naval strategy.

Actually, if you fight against GB, you need to kill convoys and submarines are the best at it.
If you fight USSR, then you need coastal and landing support and should build some CAs or BCs.
Fighting against Germany you should build Anti-Sub DDs.
Fighting against Italian Navy you should do smth with their bunch of DDs and Cruisers. But the question is "why?" Much easier to cut their lines with subs, leaving their fleet to british navy.

Your fleet idea is good for Germany after France falls. As support group to kill DDs, hunting your Subs. Kill weak groups, flee from strong. Maybe smth simular good against USA or Japan. In this case you need more light guns, good detection, armor and speed. No heavy heavy guns or torps. And maybe one escort-CV. For detection and protection from enemy CVs. Not for bombing

 

[Gort11]

Yes, its just setting HIT_PROFILE_SPEED_FACTOR from 2 to 0.5 in defines. It's planned to be fixed in the next patch either way

In case anyone else is in the same boat as I was, you can find this on line 1831 of Hearts of Iron IV\common\defines\00_defines.lua

 

[blahmaster6k]

This is due to the current naval hit chance error (a multiplier that was set to 2 instead of 0.5) that heavily reduces torp hit chance so it may work in current patches but not in the next one

I've seen you mention a lot of bugs and other weird interactions recently that are apparently common knowledge in the MP community. I haven't played MP for probably a couple years now so my knowledge of this type of thing is out of date. Is there some sort of list of these things somewhere, or does it just spread by word of mouth in discord servers?

 

[PorkchopSandwiches247]

While naval game is funny, you should clearly understand, what is your goal for navy and who is your enemy.

Killing enemy ships is not a goal. The possible goal is support your landing. Defend your trade lines, Kill enemy convoys. Depend on this you should plan your naval strategy.

Actually, if you fight against GB, you need to kill convoys and submarines are the best at it.
If you fight USSR, then you need coastal and landing support and should build some CAs or BCs.
Fighting against Germany you should build Anti-Sub DDs.
Fighting against Italian Navy you should do smth with their bunch of DDs and Cruisers. But the question is "why?" Much easier to cut their lines with subs, leaving their fleet to british navy.

Your fleet idea is good for Germany after France falls. As support group to kill DDs, hunting your Subs. Kill weak groups, flee from strong. Maybe smth simular good against USA or Japan. In this case you need more light guns, good detection, armor and speed. No heavy heavy guns or torps. And maybe one escort-CV. For detection and protection from enemy CVs. Not for bombing

I mean, I agree with you, I just mostly want to enjoy the naval game. Itd be nice to actually have a useful fleet instead of just building towards an outcome.