German Naval Strategy

[SacremPyrobolum]

I tend to focus on Battleship/destroyer only fleets and of course submarines. This way I do not have to spread out my research to keep the various ship types up to date. I also feel that battleships are more in line with Germany than carrier fleets.

Would it be worth it though to research and build some escort carriers to add to the fleet for the sole purpose of countering carrier squadrons?

Also, what is a good ratio of BB/DD? I usually go 1/3.

Also, at what technology level should I lay down my first battleship? I usually wait until I can build the H-39, which I believe is in the 1939 tech tier.

 

[Secret Master]

Well, you haven't told me what the purpose of your navy is. Different compositions and technological approaches are useful when achieving different objectives.

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

Naval supremacy I guess. Being able to smash the enemy fleets to smithereens and ruling the waves. Barring that, crippling the enemy industries with submarines.

 

[Secret Master]

Naval supremacy I guess. Being able to smash the enemy fleets to smithereens and ruling the waves. Barring that, crippling the enemy industries with submarines.

Those are two fundamentally different goals.

The reason I press you on this topic is because HOI3 isn't the kind of game where you ask, "What is the best build for class/country X?" It is the kind of game where you ask, "I want to gain maritime supremacy between 1939 and 1941 just around continental Europe so I can invade Britain in Operation Sea Lion; what kind of navy should I build?" Time, geography, and mission all radically change the kind of navy you should build. The navy I would use to defeat Britain in 1940 would not look the same as a navy I would use to convoy raid the Allies through 1943, nor would it look the same as a navy I would use to make an invasion of North America possible in 1945.

First of all, let me ask some more detailed questions:

1) Do you intend to invade the United States? If so, are you planning to do it after defeating Britain by 1940?

2) Do you intend to ever project naval strength beyond the Atlantic? You looking to invade South America, Asia, or ANZAC?

3) Do you want to spend a lot of IC on a navy? Or are you looking for a cheap naval solution to Germany's problems?

4) Do you intend to attack the Soviets in June or July of 1941?

5) Do you intend to just convoy raid the Allies to death so you can have a free hand on the continent?

6) How much experience do you have winning the air war? Can you confidently say that you can defeat the Allies and Soviets in the skies without too many problems?

7) Do you even care what Japan does in the Pacific?

8) Do you care if the Soviets get Lend-Lease?

 

[Kovax]

In my opinion, it pays to research one level of techs before building your first BBs, but waiting for the 1939 techs means that they won't complete until around '42-'43, by which time it's generally almost "game over" anyway.

My last GER game, I built two BCs (Scharnhorst class), starting in early and mid '36, as much for the Practicals as for the actual ships, plus a couple more CAs. Once the first round of BB research was done (late '36), I started work on Bismarck and then Tirpitz (early '37). The completion of Scharnhorst sped up construction on the next BC, and together they allowed completion of both BBs around the outbreak of the war in spring of '39. After laying the keels for two more BBs to replace the completed BCs in the construction que, I switched capital ship research over to CVs, which become WAY more important if/when you need to stray out of range of your own land-based air.

I used fleets of 2xBB or BC, 2xCA, and around 6-8 CL (1.5:1 or 2:1 ratio), so I could break off (or lose) a CL or two without suffering the "insufficient screens" penalty. CL uses a different doctrine group than DD and BB, so it costs more to research, but they have greater range, seem to last longer in combat, and generally manage to break off for repairs rather than sink. DD gives you higher fleet speed, lower cost, better ASW capabilities, and some synergy with doctrines. Pick one or the other, depending on your goals.

Once I rebased the first pair of BBs to the French coast, I was able to demolish a significant portion of the RN, including 8+ BBs, 3 BCs, something like 5 CAs, and a host of CLs and DDs, plus one unlucky CVL. I never killed a single CV with my BB fleets, and my SAGs couldn't engage them without taking heavy damage, even with land-based air support (their annoying CAGs restore enough ORG in one hour to fly again, and again, and again); those had to wait for my own carriers to complete.

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

1. I am looking to defeat Britain ASAP after the Fall of France. Not really looking to invade America. Would rather starve them out and leave them isolated

2. I want to be able to reach west India to put a stake in Britian if it doesn't capitulate after Sealion and Japan isn't moving into east India.

3. I usually play on easy so I have a little more leeway than most, so a move expensive navy that I can use to win deceive naval battles is preferable.

4. Yes

5. At the onset of the war I plan to deploy submarine fleets to blockade Britain in the Atlantic but that is not my final goal. I want to starve their production in preparation for Sealion

6. I am confident that I can win the air war against Allies and Soviets

7. As long as Japan does well and pushes into Russian and the Commonwealth I'm happy.

8. I don't see any way to prevent Soviets getting lend-lease and I cannot blockade them in the Pacific.

 

[Kagemusha]

In order to defeat the Brits and French navies without having to sacrifice my own one I let my stay within the confines of the Baltic sea and only rarely venture out outside of the confines of the Skagerrak.

Usually the english and french after a while get cocky and send their fleets into the Skagerrak and Kattegatt ... at which time I send out my fleets to wage battle there ... within reach of my naval bombers, normal bombers and enough interceptors to not having to worry about enemy CAGs.

When the english fleet gets defeated and tries to flee it normally uses the direction deeper into the baltic sea (which is blocked by Zealand, meaning that within a day their fleet will return to the sea region where it last got defeated by my fleet, initiating battle again ... and so on ... until finally even their big ships get sunk.

Aside from this I prefer to wage submarine warfare as soon as france is defeated and the southern ports are available.
The submarines and also the german Hilfskreuzer ae extremly useful in order to raid convoys

(O.K., Hilskreuzer are something you IIRC only have with the Blackice mod)

 

[DKoW]

You could stick with the navy you start with and focus only on building naval bombers or CAGs. Less IC eaten up in construction, allowing for more land based units to be built. And, when based on land, if you park your fleet in the English channel you can just bomb the British fleet into oblivion. No need to build more ships.

 

[Secret Master]

1. I am looking to defeat Britain ASAP after the Fall of France. Not really looking to invade America. Would rather starve them out and leave them isolated

2. I want to be able to reach west India to put a stake in Britian if it doesn't capitulate after Sealion and Japan isn't moving into east India.

3. I usually play on easy so I have a little more leeway than most, so a move expensive navy that I can use to win deceive naval battles is preferable.

Alright, then let's talk Sea Lion.

First thing's first: You don't need carriers to project naval power against England. You can use INTs and MRs and NAVs to kill the RAF and RN without even thinking about carriers at all.

Learn this lesson well: Land-based air power is deadly against navies and enemy carriers. As long as your ships operate under cover of land based air (since you indicated that air superiority is not a problem), you don't need CVLs or anything like that.

Secondly, you cannot starve the US. You can isolate them, but the US generates enough resources to feed massive IC on her home continent. Convoy raiding the US and expecting to kill off her industry won't happen. Starving her overseas possessions will be hard, since the US can literally afford to replace 1000 convoys every 100 days.

What ships to build?

Let's talk about battleships for a moment. Everyone loves BBs. They are strong, powerful units that inflate your ego. They are also unnecessary if you intend to operate near the continent and take down the British. Furthermore, old battleships are basically useless for anything beyond shore bombardment or fighting other old battleships. CAs and CLs with 1938/1940 techs can easily overcome everything in the RN's fleet that was built before 1936 as long as you have some land based air. The newer ships, including the King George V battleships, will be too few in number to make a difference.

On the other hand, CAs and CLs build quickly, have cheaper techs to research, and generate practicals quickly, which further speeds up research. This means that if you go with a CA/CL based navy and just ignore BBs, BCs, CVs, and SHBBs, you can put more technologically advanced ships into action sooner.

Also, CLs and CAs share the same practicals, so every CL you build makes CAs cheaper, and every CA you build makes your CLs cheaper.

I would advise 6-8 CAs and 10-16 CLs per fleet (depending on how confident you are). More experienced players can get away with a 1/1 or 1/1.5 ratio of capital ships to screens, but for newer players I'd advise 1/2. I' also advise 1/2 if you intend to stay at sea for extended periods.

4. Yes

5. At the onset of the war I plan to deploy submarine fleets to blockade Britain in the Atlantic but that is not my final goal. I want to starve their production in preparation for Sealion

If you intend to launch Sea Lion, submarines are not the right answer. Convoy raiding may be a waste of time unless you just want the RN to wander the North Atlantic away from the English Channel (giving you a better chance of crossing).

Either go for Sea Lion, or choose to convoy raid. Don't bother doing both except as a distraction.

Also, since you are launching Barbarossa on schedule, you want a faster victory against the UK. Convoy raiding is all about long term strategic warfare. You should be aware that in 1939 and 1940, the UK has very few army units at home, especially if you destroy a bunch during the Battle of France. Get past the RN with a panzer corps and some infantry, and it's over.

6. I am confident that I can win the air war against Allies and Soviets

Then make sure you use land-based air to support the fleet. Even CAS has decent anti-ship attacks. So, while your TACs and CAS aren't busy after France is beaten, use them to bomb ships.

7. As long as Japan does well and pushes into Russian and the Commonwealth I'm happy.

8. I don't see any way to prevent Soviets getting lend-lease and I cannot blockade them in the Pacific.

You can base German naval assets in Japan once they are in the Axis, even if they aren't in the war. I'll let you think about the implications for a moment.

Something to keep in mind:

Enemy ships do not stay in sea zones for very long while steaming around the map. This makes it hard to bomb them, because even if your plane are on target, they get one "turn" to bomb and then the ships leave the area.

But if enemy ships are locked down in a surface battle, they may spend 12 or more hours in a single sea zone. This allows land based air to pound them over and over again. So, maneuver your cruisers into combats with the RN in range of air bases. Then pile on both INTs and bombers. Your fleet "pins" them in place while the Luftwaffe kills them. If you have air superiority over Britain itself, bomb the enemy ships when they retreat to port.

And every Royal Navy ship you sink is one less the Italians and Japanese must face later. The Italians are notorious in HOI3 for doing 1000% better if the RN is hurt or distracted. Japan not so much, but even the AI can invade India if the RN is out of the picture.

 

[Riaelyn]

If you're playing unmodded HOI 3 you basically just sail in an invasion fleet without problem against the AI. In a previous game I just sailed in and dropped about 10 divisions of marines just east of London with little problem. This was on normal difficulty and in either September or October of 1940. Realistically, this could easily have been infantry instead of marines. The only real naval build I did was building 2 BCs, 12 transports and a few light cruisers. Thus, I used two fleets, one "battle fleet" and one transport fleet and always kept them in the same sea province. While its hard to kill anything this way with the overstacking penalty it didn't matter to me because I was just trying to protect my invasion force. It really didn't take too much naval investment to land an invasion force. Convoys weren't a problem and I flew in supplies via air until I could take more ports. Even that being said, the UK really didn't try to hit the supply convoys sailing supplies to my troops in England. On my second wave, I sailed in 10 light armored divisions and I've been running roughshod over the UK since. I've never encountered the UK having a sizeable garrison force. The RN only engaged me once while I was landing troops and I was able to force them to flee with no losses for either side. As for the tech levels, everything was up to date but not teched ahead at all.

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

Are Marines useful for Germany in Sealion for establishing a beachhead or should I just land with infantry?

 

[Riaelyn]

Are Marines useful for Germany in Sealion for establishing a beachhead or should I just land with infantry?

Not really, I built them for shits and giggles but ending up only using 3 divisions worth instead of the full 10 I built to actually assault a defended port province. Most of the marines hit the coast uncontested. Thus, I could have just used infantry to be dumped on the uncontested parts of the coast and been just fine. You're bigger problem will be making sure that you get a port province quickly (and then more port provinces based on your army size) or having enough control of the skies to bring in supplies via transport plane until you can. That being said, if you plan on invading provinces that actually have defenders, then marines will of course perform better than infantry for an amphibious assault. If you are like me and bringing a bare bones navy, this could be really important. The longer the invasion takes (by using infantry instead of marines), the more likely the Royal Navy will decide to re-engage your transport fleet and may sink things. The Royal Navy only engaged me once but had they decided to do it some more I could have incurred losses. I also stationed a few subs around the UK on passive to watch where their fleets were sailing so I could try to avoid them.

Once you understand the game and how to play it, you can run circles around the AI. It's why most players either start running mods to up the difficulty level or (like me) use self imposed rules. For instance on this campaign, I haven't changed my economic law from war economy to total mobilization. Why? For the hell of it and to try to simulate Germany more realistically at the time. A human opponent is completely a separate matter of course. If I had tried this against a human opponent that understands the game, I would have been trounced. A UK player would be hitting me with everything they have to try to prevent my troops from even getting off of the boats.

 

[21oliver]

As for Sea Lion, ive done it dozens of times. I never ever have any air support, I never build more then some combination of BBx2, CAx2, CLx2-4. I never fail to take the British Isles, its just too easy. I simply cannot see spending all that effort and resources and units for any additional. Many times i take the British Isles with just the German starting Navy. I PL LC's from Japan, about a dozen or so, sometimes as many as 20. I launch a massive amphibious assault 15-20 INF & ARM units in the North of England. Then i launch a 2nd assault in the middle (eastern side) of the UK, with another 15-20 units. After that the UK is done.

 

[Riaelyn]

Like Secret Master was pointing out, there's a large difference between invading the UK and trying to kill the RN.

My personal goal for myself is to invade the UK using nothing but airborne troops and air cover ala Crete on steroids.

 

[21oliver]

If it is someones goal to defeat the opposing navy then yes that is a special case, I myself generally defeat "naval" nations without really much conflict with their navy, I usually bypass them more or less.

 

[Kovax]

The easiest way to destroy the RN is NOT to fight them. Simply distract the RN (using subs or a fast DD group) to lure them out of the Channel, then send your loaded transports across. Subs make great spotters, so you can tell where their ships are, even if your radar installations aren't complete yet. You can also block one sea province on each side of your landing zone, so your modest fleet intercepts and delays theirs, rather than risk your transports in the combat. Make easy and uncontested landings on either side of a decent port, grab the port, then bring more troops across. A few weeks later, no more UK, and no more RN. It falls into the "clubbing baby seals" and "robbing baby carriages" difficulty category.

I generally place a restriction on my Axis games (GER, ITA, HUN, or JAP) that I can't invade the UK until/unless I have closed off the Med to Allied shipping, forcing the UK to use and defend the long route around Africa to supply its colonies and possessions in India, Asia, and the Pacific. That generally doesn't happen until late '40 or early '41, so a submarine raiding force and naval war still have some meaning, and the UK has time to build up its home defenses a bit more.