Can it be done? I've only ever played USA and GER, and I always build carriers and have fun seeing how many kills I can get with em. They steam to steamroll everything, maybe realistically so. Most times if you build 4 as germany you can sink everything the UK and USA has with little loss. I always threw in a few battleships though WITH the carriers, and they would get a few kills. But I want a new naval challenge, so how possible is it for me to take on USA and UK fleet with a battleship fleet? I know its not optimal but for fun I build a whole fleet (BB, BC, CA, CL,DD) 18 admiral size. Im at 1939 now and I'm about to see how possible it is lol. Am I gonna get destroyed buy the carriers? I feel like I have seen enemy ships close the battle length to battleship range and get hits in on carriers.
-
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.
Try Scharnhorst BC1938. Give them the camoflage brigade and you get a cost efficient SAG. Still i would recommend only 6BC1938+6CL1938. Bigger fleets have downsides. If a bigger fleet of the UK tries to hunt your SAG lure them into a trap of many CAS or NAV. As soon as the UK fleet has lost most of their strenght the Scharnhorsts can wipe out what is left of it.
Some people have had very good success using BCs against UK CVs. Usually the encounter occurred in the English Channel during bad weather so giving the BCs extra advantage. But my Kreiegsmarine did not fare well when the British carriers caught my 3 BC and 3 CL out in the ocean with clear weather. And I had camou - but does it matter much with a sunny day?
U-boats are muh cheaper. Donitz has reported to me that he has sunk a most impressive list of Britsh CVLs and CVs. Can't wait to get nuclear subs!
@ Adam Don't take on the British CVs using a mixed German SAG. Follow Pang's advice to use only BCs with camou and CL screens... and make Karl Donitz Chief of the Navy (BC offensive combat modifier +10%).
Last edited:
Since we're speaking of it, I always mix different types of ships, whether in my SAGs or CTFs. But, assuming I have a very powerful industry (like the US) or I'm forced to have the best fleet ever, whatever the price (like JAP), would it be better if I only used the best at-the-time flag ships along with the best at-the-time screen vessels?
This would likely be preferable. So there are two options. Mix CV with DD or mix CA or BC or BB with CL. CL can better take some damage. CV Fleets donnot require this skill, so the better sub detection of DD can help.
That looks so gamey. :rofl:
I wonder if I'll be doing it in the future, considering I like having good-looking, complete, realistic (or not?) fleets with (for a CTF example) mixed CVs, CVLs, Heavy- and Light cruisers, DDs, and one or two subs. ^^
I wonder if I'll be doing it in the future, considering I like having good-looking, complete, realistic (or not?) fleets with (for a CTF example) mixed CVs, CVLs, Heavy- and Light cruisers, DDs, and one or two subs. ^^
You are right. And that was a realistic fleet - still is realistic. No USA CV fleet goes out without a sub attached to the Task Force. But what is gamey is one thing. What is the best as regards the game and how the engine works is quite another.
As regards how the game works, CVs only with DDs is a good choice. But CVs with CLs instead for the screens is a better defensive choice since enemy BCs can close with CVs.
@ Pang
Regarding the sub detection of DDs screening CVs the DDs are very disappointing since they hardly ever contribute to the battle on account of the CVs maintaining a stand off distance using aircraft - which do not kill enemy subs anywhere close to what just modern DDs can do.
Hence, it is a waste of precious CVs to even use them for hunting subs. This job is BEST accomplished by making several "hunter-killer" groups of pure DDS (I usually do 3 per set). And my CVs go after the enemy surface fleets. OF course this begs the question, "What if my 3 DDs run into any enemy surface fleet"? Frankly, besides being the best sub-killers the game offers, my DDS are excellent bait for my CVs to sink the enemy surface fleet that attacks them. It really is co-ordination of fleets to obtain naval supremacy.
Now, as regards the other issue - gamey - I could not agree more. Sadly, AoD still needs a LOT OF WORK before naval warfare even comes close to any realism. I too would love realistic fleets. But you can't add a sub because then your CVs never get anywhere fast enough. You can't add BBs, BCs and CAs because then the higher stacking limit works against you and - usually - those ships never get involved because of the CVs much longer range. Frankly its is NUTS!
So, I can only say "Do what makes you happiest playing the game". But please don't expect AoD naval warfare to fit realism.
Sometimes I think that plastic game "You sunk my battleship!" has more realism. However, the Ace of Spades is the Hearts of Iron family of games as regards "Strategy".
Just my two-pence worth.
Well, considering the enemy also uses mixed naval forces, doing so may not be the most efficient, and AoD may not be the most realistic naval battle simulator. But at least it's balanced.
Little update for those interested. Been a huge flop so far. Bismarck sunk.....Ran into a few huge stacks got mauled, only a few enemy ships sunk. But Im not gonna give up im gonna send out the fleet again its almost ready to roll
Massive kill list of surviving Tirpitz lol
Massive kill list of surviving Tirpitz lol
True, the AI uses a hodge podge, and actually can be quite impressive with it..
But iF you want balance I suggest sinking one of your ships via disbanding for every enemy ship you sink. Warfare is not about "balance". It is only about winning... or losing. The AI actually has several advantages which you - the human - don't have. For starters try "unlimited" global range (a topic that is still being defined). Next add "Not needing any port to survive for years in a Med completely closed off by enemy and not a single friendly base to avail of”. Finally, how about "perfect intel" of where your fleets are?
Sure, I am totally for game balance. But assembling my fleets so they purposefully are considerably less efficient is not the right way, I think. What is the point if the player cannot use his knowledge, skill, and risk to do the best he can achieve?
Besides, if the player commits an error the AI is right there to capitalize on that mistake. It is MOST EASY to have your fleet wiped out (annihilated) because of a blunder, because of having shown the AI your predictability, or because you sailed where you shouldn't have.
EDIT: Thanks Adam for your timely post proving the game has "balance". I actually first saw your post AFTER I had posted this. GREAT TIMING!
The balance is in the human doing superior or inferior to what the AI can do to the human. And the AI simply has no intrepedation at all. Seems Adam doesn't either! :ninja:
"Oh Tirpitz. Your sister is calling you from the deep warning you of your fate. Heed the call for the glory of the Third Reich!"
Last edited:
AoD is leagues ahead of Arma or DH though.
When you're going to be fighting carriers, being able to close quickly if you don't manage to get good luck initially is critical, and BC-CL can be really deadly against Carriers - I don't think it's really worth it as Japan, but as Germany your tech teams and doctrine are massively oriented toward BB's and BC's over carriers so it's probably the best path.
BB's are still decent too since you don't have any useful legacy units, so your whole navy will be modern and fast.
I always run into either 40-50 units which destroys my 18 or less, or a group of......1 or 2. Maybe Ill just build a super group of 30 for fun see what happens
I did not mean to use CV in a anti sub role. The DDs are mostly a defence gainst Subs that might close up to CV. Actually CV have a decent sub attack value, so one can use them this way if no better usage fo the fleet is available. But DD only or CVL+DD fleets are a much cheaper alternative for this role.
Imo you should aim for medium siced flets of 6+6 or 9+9 ships. Bigger fleets are the prefered target for your airforce as you cannot possible miss them. :laugh:
Very nice, but I wonder how you were able to sink 19/20 ships, some of them carriers, just off the British coastline with just 23 ships of your own, and taking no casualties.
EDIT: Oh, just realised you had taken Britain, but still, the Royal Navy wasn't that bad.
I guess this goes to show its possible! I had my fleet waiting when I took Scapa Flow. I it was 45 ships and I engaged them and sunk a couple and they ran, I guessed correct which way they were running and followed and finished them off as you see. I have sunk 1 USA carrier too but they have over 20 left! Gonna keep trying but It seems like in naval combat you either steamroll or get steamrolled not much in the middle for relatively even losses. Stuff rolled the right way i closed the distance fast while it was night and you see the firepower I had the fleet just unloaded I guess. This was a completely mixed fleet too for my personal enjoyment BB, BC, CA, CL, DD.
WWII marked the last time major BBs fired at each other. Aircraft make them obsolete and AoD poorly reflects what aircraft do to ships and subs.
That said, it also underestimates the air defenses of major ships.
I'd never want to take a fleet of BBs up against any fleet protected under a CV air umbrella unless the weather kept the planes out of the air. For AoD, having one of two CVs just lets the opposing fleet get its paint scraped and it runs away, but when you have four to six CVs they do tend to kill pretty good.
That said, it also underestimates the air defenses of major ships.
I'd never want to take a fleet of BBs up against any fleet protected under a CV air umbrella unless the weather kept the planes out of the air. For AoD, having one of two CVs just lets the opposing fleet get its paint scraped and it runs away, but when you have four to six CVs they do tend to kill pretty good.
As Germany, I find three CV-IV with CL-V is a fleet having excellent range... and they seem to kill pretty good anything they run into. A couple CVs is too small. But six might be far too large compared to what two sets of three each can achieve. It is wise to keep them in proximity - just in case the USA is running TFs of six CV-IV.