Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Download CORE 0.62.8

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
I do not know. It looks a lot like the foundation of "Cruizerg" fleets in base HoI2, which would, if I am not mistaken, "warp into" firing range of all ships.

But then, normal SAGs do it right now, no need to have one and the same firing distance on all ships included, so yes, it probably is somewhat "new".
 
I think one of the points with Cruizerg fleets was you could set them up with the right combination and tech levels and/or attachments of light and heavy cruisers such that they all had the same max range. AFAIK in HOI2 fleets didn't automatically close such that all the screens necessarily got into range.

something like this

from an old post on it:

"Okay, I understand the principle of the cruizerg fleet: build CLs with fire control attachments and CAs without, so that when the fleet closes to its optimum firing distance, which is 90% of the shortest-ranged capital ship's range, all the ships will be in range so will be able to do devastating damage to the enemy fleet."
 
Certainly true, at the same time it may be very detrimental to approach towards the smallest common firing range.
... But it is also true that this is not necessarily connected to fleets starting combat at the smallest firing range of any unit in either fleet.
 
Hi,

Agree it seems like a lot of TP. But the AI loses hoards of them and will collapse ahistorically if it runs out too fast. You can certainly try some testing to determine if a lower level is acceptable.

WRT to range, are you sure a TP/Escort fleet engages at the TP range while the unescorted TP fleet engages at maximum? If that is the case maybe we need to just make the TP distance equal the maximum. IIRC the TP don't even fire even though they are set up with a minimal Attack value. At the time I assumed they would shoot and never changed it.

mm
 
Actually, I think that it only engages at the smallest firing distance without considering that of TPs.
- This part needs a bit of testing, will try and see to it.

But that still means that a pure transport fleet, which spawns as far away as possible (usually somewhere in the 100km-range), has a better chance to escape.

Optimal conduct would be to have a separate fleet one hour behind the transport fleet, so it can join the battle to absorb hits, while still allowing the TPs to run. The AI (occassionally) actually tries to do something like that... but only with DDs (which it also seldomly adds to transport fleets) and that, unfortunately, is actually worse than sending the TPs alone.
 
Hi,

Added a post over there. The described formula seems to favor larger fleets d2 the bulk quantity of Detection they have. IMO this isn't very historical d2 the RW formation mechanics.

mm
 
yeah... well if it figures to be (detection(A)/visibility(A))/(detection(B)/visibility(B))

I guess it'd be possible to tweak the values a bit for 'raider' sorts of ships. CORE was the mod with the camouflage addon's that lower visibility too right?

The key think that I can see to make engagements survivable insofar as allowing Germany to try surface raiders if they want, is making the detection/visibility ratios of the sort of ships that the UK fields worse than those that Germany can field as surface raiders.

Maybe make older battleships particularly BAD at detecting to the point they really drag down the overall detection/visibility ratio of the fleet, so a big deathstack with 6 BB's and a heap of cruisers and old destroyers will rarely see that small cruiser squadron or CA/DD/DD group first.

If you make BC's and CA's in particular relatively less visible given their detection than BB's that helps a bit I guess.

Also maybe make regular DD's not that amazing? I know there's a fleet destroyer thing, and that should definitely help drag it up, but maybe the surface detection shouldn't actually be that great for cheap pickets.
 
I am not yet convinced that this particular formula is truly the crux of the problem.
- Even if detected, a much faster and smaller fleet should still have an easy time to escape; my limited tests indicate that this works fine, unless the engagement starts at night... which in AoD is effectively a constant 50% chance.
 
Hi,

historicaly there are plenty of examples of fleets blundering into each other at night. Most of the Pacific non-carrier engagements were fought at night and a lot of them started very close. North cape is another example of a faster and smaller fleet getting decimated. I agree that there are some issues here. IMO large fleets get way too much detection credit.

For example a fleet of 25 ships gets full credit for all 25. ITRW a substantial amount of those ships would be inside of the destroyer screen and would provide very limited additional detection capability. Or lets just say 2 cruisers are operating together. Clearly the search arcs are going to overlap somewhat. There should be a stacking penalty applied to the detection values.

mm
 
dec152000 said:
Hi,

For example a fleet of 25 ships gets full credit for all 25. ITRW a substantial amount of those ships would be inside of the destroyer screen and would provide very limited additional detection capability. Or lets just say 2 cruisers are operating together. Clearly the search arcs are going to overlap somewhat. There should be a stacking penalty applied to the detection values.
Click to expand...

Yeah but there isn't, and nobody's making any more actual hardcode changes to AoD now as far as I know.
It seems to me that however it works as far as the mechanics go is what you guys are stuck with as modders.
 
The FRA TT Hotchkiss et Cie got the Chemistry specialty removed, but not its VIC counterpart.Intended?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back