Divisions going by Sea when enemy has 100% naval superiority

[Karaya 1]

Ok so i just started my first game in the new expansion.
I was playing China, obviously and there are 2 things that just made me turn it off after about an hour.

1. The new fieldmarshal system makes you reassign your frontlines in between the armys every damned 2 minutes if the frontline changes. Its as annoying as i thought it would be. THIS is the main reason people put all their stuff in one big Fieldmarhal army before, with the obvious exception of breakthrough divisions.

Its extremely frustrating to me to reassign which of my 3 armies holds which positions on the frontline of shanxi- beijing.

Im willing to go so far as to say im not familiar with the new system and i need to relearn everything. OK. But this is exactly what i feared would happend when youre forced to use multiple armies.

2. What is still as infuriating as ever, my port garrisons apparently thought it was a good idea to reinforce a particular one, by merrily boarding a convoy ship and sailing along.

PLEASE for the love of god give us some silly button to make armies NOT go by sea. PLEASE. If im playing Germany and i lose a couple of divisions here and there its not as infuriating as losing like 5 divisions before noticing as CHINA. ( and then seeing another 2 do the exact same thing while im figuring it out at that moment)

It just kinda makes Garrison commands for ports so annoying. Either you accept losing divisions, or manually make a new army for each couple of ports or something. And thats just ridiculous.

I realize I might be overreacting a bit but after so many months of (as far as i can tell) bringing up the 2nd issue and its still as annoying as ever.

 

[billcorr]

2. What is still as infuriating as ever, my port garrisons apparently thought it was a good idea to reinforce a particular one, by merrily boarding a convoy ship and sailing along.

Would it be worthwhile to submit a bug report?

It might already exist.

But if not, a bug report could help focus attention to this issue.

It can be a very annoying feature (losing divisions as they recklessly choose to go by sea ).

 

[LakeClouds]

my port garrisons apparently thought it was a good idea to reinforce a particular one, by merrily boarding a convoy ship and sailing along

Seems like a lot of bugs still for a game that's been out so long.

 

[Kaosium]

PLEASE for the love of god give us some silly button to make armies NOT go by sea. PLEASE.

That makes me wonder, it seldom affects me as much as I often play positions that have good navies or build one if I don't, but I can certainly understand how enraging it could be for other players and on the face of it doesn't seem like a difficult fix. From almost the beginning I've seen players request one, how hard can it be to have a button that prevents the AI from using sea transport for your forces, or those in a certain army?

 

[DicRoNero]

This has been said over and over again, but I find it extremely silly that you need 51% naval supremacy in order to dare landing your million elite troops onto militia-defended shores on the other side of a swimming pool, yet transporting them around Africa is no problem whatsoever even if the mightiest vessel you ever put into service was Destroyer I.

 

[Marcus]

How about a check for ACTIVE and RECENT Naval Supremacy in every single Sea Zone in the potential path?

 

[billcorr]

@Jamey described the problem of suicidal convoys in a well written post.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/my-perspective-on-the-cornflakes-ai.1079184/

I include Jamey's excerpt that specifically addresses convoys here for reference:

Nice analysis and illustration of various factors influencing the problem.
Thank you, Jamey.

 

[safe-keeper]

That makes me wonder, it seldom affects me as much as I often play positions that have good navies or build one if I don't, but I can certainly understand how enraging it could be for other players and on the face of it doesn't seem like a difficult fix. From almost the beginning I've seen players request one, how hard can it be to have a button that prevents the AI from using sea transport for your forces, or those in a certain army?

Or simply have the AI check for naval superiority and refrain from using transports in hostile waters.

I mean, they already check for supply levels and withhold divisions if sending them to the front would cause supply shortages. Just do the same check for naval superiority and then either move troops over land or have them stay and show that yellow exclamation mark next to the counter to let the player know the AI is reluctant to move them.

Follow-up: notify us when troops can't move this way, and then maybe have a "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" button that lets the AI move troops by sea anyway, as others suggested.

 

[Jamey]

Nice analysis and illustration of various factors influencing the problem.
Thank you, Jamey.

Happy to help.

 

[Meglok]

How about a check for ACTIVE and RECENT Naval Supremacy in every single Sea Zone in the potential path?

The issue with something like this idea is how much lag adding these constant calculations would add? People are already complaining about lag as it is. And since ship movement is dynamic, do you continue checking as the unit follows it's path and re-route if the enemy suddenly appears in your path, or just look before launching and ignore dynamic changes? Naval movement paths can be halfway around the world, and in MP your opponent might decide to sail when he sees your transports sail.

This is not a simple fix and will take some serious re-working of how the naval system works to fix. And it might never be adequately fixed, only improved. Optimally the ai should only sail in sea zones with positive naval supremacy, or with some type of currently non-existent escort system where escorts attach to transport convoys. This was possible in HOI3 where there was a "transport" unit. Now in HOI4 we have generic convoys that are not really naval units. Fixing the problem is going to take some work.

 

[Abadon777]

Countries on AI should check 1. Check for at war if not no problem transport troops. Check for naval superiority, if not then don't send troops or go to next option. 3. Connect troop convoy with Naval escort that gives AI naval superiority if ships are available . A player doesn't have to worry about this because he wouldn't send his army to doom.

 

[Brucesim2003]

Sea transport has been complained about since the game released. The devs insist that they want to fix the problem properly, and have basically point blank refused to give us a 'no sea transport' toggle as a band-aid until they do fix it.

Not sure how to make them realise that this problem is EXTREMELY irritating and NEEDS a temporary player controlled order until it is fixed. As it stands atm, wartime garrison orders need to be micro'ed.

 

[safe-keeper]

The issue with something like this idea is how much lag adding these constant calculations would add? People are already complaining about lag as it is. And since ship movement is dynamic, do you continue checking as the unit follows it's path and re-route if the enemy suddenly appears in your path, or just look before launching and ignore dynamic changes? Naval movement paths can be halfway around the world, and in MP your opponent might decide to sail when he sees your transports sail.

This is not a simple fix and will take some serious re-working of how the naval system works to fix. And it might never be adequately fixed, only improved. Optimally the ai should only sail in sea zones with positive naval supremacy, or with some type of currently non-existent escort system where escorts attach to transport convoys. This was possible in HOI3 where there was a "transport" unit. Now in HOI4 we have generic convoys that are not really naval units. Fixing the problem is going to take some work.

They can already check if there is enough supply, doing periodic checks for naval supremacy doesn't sound all that different and would only be relevant when the AI considers moving a unit by sea.

 

[Abadon777]

It would be nice if Paradox could add a new feature in its next DLC that besides radar you use surveillance planes that could be use on a patrol mission to help spot ships. It was used in a game called PTO to spot both convoys and fleets sailing in sea regions. Make them a cheaper cost with less accuracy than radar.

 

[Shaka of Carthage]

It would be nice if Paradox could add a new feature in its next DLC that besides radar you use surveillance planes that could be use on a patrol mission to help spot ships. It was used in a game called PTO to spot both convoys and fleets sailing in sea regions. Make them a cheaper cost with less accuracy than radar.

Why can't we go with a design for effect, in that the radar represents reconnaissance aircraft as well as radar? Reduces micromanagement.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Would it be worthwhile to submit a bug report?

It might already exist.

But if not, a bug report could help focus attention to this issue.

It can be a very annoying feature (losing divisions as they recklessly choose to go by sea ).

When I reported that players get a hidden penalty for micromanaging against the broken battle planner I got told it was WAD. Wad of something I suppose . The state of plan automation in this game is pretty rough.

Sea transport has been complained about since the game released.

Automated movement in general does not work and that is not new to 1.5.

his is not a simple fix and will take some serious re-working of how the naval system works to fix.

Actually a toggle to not use boats sounds pretty simple, same with just strategically redeploying over land when there's a direct path through friendly territory.

Moving over water should be exceptional/as required, given the present mechanics in the game.

 

[Meglok]

Actually a toggle to not use boats sounds pretty simple, same with just strategically redeploying over land when there's a direct path through friendly territory.

Might want to think this "simple" idea through. Blocking the use of naval transport by the ai might help the European Axis, but it completely breaks the USA, Japan, the Commonwealth, and the UK, not to mention making ti impossible for the ai to fight well in North Africa.

The fix for kamikaze transporting is probably going to have to be a naval superiority check of some kind, and that will have to be incorporated into the naval system fix.

 

[billcorr]

Why can't we go with a design for effect, in that the radar represents reconnaissance aircraft as well as radar? Reduces micromanagement.

"design for effect"

Great concept!

Especially that part about reducing micromanagement.

(But then that would mean we wouldn't get Catalinas or, or... blimps! )

But the point is well taken.

• Design for effect.
• Decrease micromanagement.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Might want to think this "simple" idea through. Blocking the use of naval transport by the ai might help the European Axis, but it completely breaks the USA, Japan, the Commonwealth, and the UK, not to mention making ti impossible for the ai to fight well in North Africa.

The fix for kamikaze transporting is probably going to have to be a naval superiority check of some kind, and that will have to be incorporated into the naval system fix.

Even if you're playing US, when you have stuff in Europe that toggle could prove useful, especially given how awful front lines can be. I've even seen troops assigned to a front line in North Africa have that line get deleted (confirmed bug) then decide arbitrarily to join a front line on Germany without input (should also be considered a bug, but who knows with that particular piece of broken ).

 

[Karaya 1]

Even if you're playing US, when you have stuff in Europe that toggle could prove useful, especially given how awful front lines can be. I've even seen troops assigned to a front line in North Africa have that line get deleted (confirmed bug) then decide arbitrarily to join a front line on Germany without input (should also be considered a bug, but who knows with that particular piece of broken ).

Could it be that they are part of a Field marshals army group and that Fieldmarshal has an actual front line for said army group ? If you then take an army and put it soemwhere else, it automatically rejoins the field marshals line when its own frontline is removed.