Give the Caspian Sea some love ?

[Graf Von Schlau]

Please do tell me more about naval warfare in the Caspian Sea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Flotilla

Like history tho, other then Russia vs Iran, it wouldn't factor much in game play

 

[Incompetent]

If the Caspian Sea was allowed to have ships on it, would they be relevant for trade in the region? Persia and Astrakhan are both currently considered 'inland' trade nodes.

 

[Mikalos]

Transporting troops across the Caspian Sea would be cool. ButI dodn't think the AI could handle a sea that has no connection to the ocean.
The

Civ has always had an issue when you could build ship[s on inland lakes, where the AI will stack the crap out of that place and have nothing in the actual oceans

What if a new pretender rises in the area and challenges that "strong enough country" ?

im sure persia is gonna rise up and challenge russia.

 

[Krajzen]

Pointless.

 

[PiriReis]

Only with a Volga–Don Canal.

 

[Dracolithfiend]

Why is that ? Wouldn't it just be similar to Constantinople ? I mean it should just be a trade node (not mandatory) but not mandatory.

I'm just thinking of various added scenarios to the region, fighting for access into other regions, trade, etc. Besides, one could use ships to blockade...

You don't understand. If nobody else can build ships in a sea and it is not connected to the world ocean then you just spam hundreds of light ships and tell them to patrol. You will have effectively created a permanent artificial end trade node where one shouldn't be.

 

[Hiram_Maxim]

IIRC the engine can't do navies on sea provinces not connected to the oceans.

 

[Chewy Yui]

Please this! I want a fleet of 1000 Ships of the Line sailing the Caspian

 

[Illianor123]

Pointless.
Just make the three major ports important centres of trade instead.

 

[TolHydra]

I've always wanted this to be a possibility at least for troop transport. However pointless as it may be, it is a sea, and I want boats on it.

 

[User29]

IIRC the engine can't do navies on sea provinces not connected to the oceans.

that's not true anymore. Look at CK2 post ROI, two completely separated Oceans capable of having ships.

 

[Utretch]

I believe there are serious issues with the engine's ability to handle unconnected sea provinces, though I heard this long ago and may be only relevant to EUIII. The gameplay benefit would be... underwhelming. Really the sea just needs to be split up so that it can't be used to make claims.

Nvm mind the sea provinces thing, no longer an issue supposedly.

 

[cleef]

How about applying a limit to ships in the sea ? Or allow only Galley-type ships and transports ?

I do understand what you guys are saying though... Being able to build transport ships would be nice though... but apply a limit to them (so that if certain nations that have other ports dont mess up their navy limit).

 

[wergy]

So... basically you wish to create a brand new set of mechanisms just to represent something that was barely present until the last century of the game's timeframe and was only marginally important?
No thanks, I'd rather have a proper Sengoku system instead...

 

[cleef]

So... basically you wish to create a brand new set of mechanisms just to represent something that was barely present until the last century of the game's timeframe and was only marginally important?
No thanks, I'd rather have a proper Sengoku system instead...

Why not have both ? -_- What if it's not that complicated to implement all this ?

 

[DicRoNero]

Civ has always had an issue when you could build ship[s on inland lakes, where the AI will stack the crap out of that place and have nothing in the actual oceans.

AI is dumb anyway, while as a player I often capitalized on that in Civ5 MP by having basically a super powerful mobile artillery able to shoot without setting up first. Besides, in Civ you could connect an inland lake to oceans, provided the gap was of 1 tile

I tend to agree the suggestion is of little use here in EU, but Astrakhan rulling the waves would be indeed hilarious.